Pete Hegseth just can’t let it go.

The Defense secretary is appealing a judge’s order blocking him from censuring Sen. Mark Kelly, D-Ariz., for participating in a video with five other Democratic lawmakers reminding service members of their duty to disobey illegal orders.

Hegseth’s determination to continue fighting Kelly in court shows how fixated he is on suppressing free speech and punishing dissent against the Pentagon. His doggedness also illustrates the Trump administration’s determination to reconceptualize the military as a politicized fighting force that shouldn’t be bound by the law.......

As Lt. Col. Rachel E. VanLandingham, who’s retired from the Air Force, wrote for MS NOW, Hegseth’s position is that he can treat military retirees the same as active service members — who do face more stringent restrictions on their speech while serving in the military, in part to ensure the military’s need for obedience to commands. But VanLandingham, who is a law professor at Southwestern Law School, Los Angeles, said “no court has ever extended this shrunken First Amendment protection to military retirees.” She added, “I trust that the D.C. Circuit, and eventually the Supreme Court, will continue to protect the free speech rights of millions of us military retirees.”

Hegseth seems to face a steep hill in his bid to punish Kelly. But even if he is unlikely to succeed on a legal level, that should not divert our attention from how dishonorable and petty his harassment of the decorated officer is. The head of the Defense Department should be focused on keeping Americans safe. But Hegseth — when he isn’t accidentally leaking war plans to journalists, doing childish pull-up competitions or insinuating U.S. soldiers shouldn’t be wary about committing war crimes — is doggedly working to make Kelly’s life more difficult and rob him of his pension because he dared to question the Trump administration.

Hegseth’s efforts also have political effects. Just like when he investigated hundreds of Defense Department employees for critical remarks after the assassination of right-wing activist Charlie Kirk, Hegseth’s vendetta against Kelly telegraphs a security vision that demands fascistic deference to political leaders.

Ultimately, Hegseth’s fury that lawmakers encouraged service members to disobey illegal orders gives away the game: Why would a man who swore to support and defend the Constitution of the United States be so angry that troops are reminded that they ought to do the same?