Copyright 2024 All Rights Reserved.

June 17, 2024

Rodney Davis Voted to Strip Military Servicemembers of Due Process Rights –

By John Kraft & Kirk Allen

On May 27, 2022

Washington D.C. (ECWd) –

H.R. 4350, the National Defense Authorization Act (“NDAA”) passed the United State House of Representatives in September 2021.

Among those voting in favor was downstate Illinois U.S. Representative Rodney Davis – see all votes HERE.

Recently, Rodney Davis has been touting his support of military servicemembers, but never mentions his vote for this Bill which strips due process rights (those rights afforded ordinary citizens) from those in the military. He even had the opportunity to sign on to the letter some House members sent to the Senate urging them to remove this portion from the Bill but didn’t – which indicates this was his intention all along.

One provision of the House-passed NDAA, Section 529, would violate the Second Amendment rights of our nation’s brave servicemembers, allowing military judges and magistrates to issue military court gun confiscation orders, and, further, such an order could be issued ex parte (without the servicemembers even knowing or permitted to defend themselves), and granting local police jurisdiction for enforcement, and such orders may not be issued, appealed, renewed, or terminated by State, local, territorial, or tribal courts.

This, in our opinion, strips servicemembers of the same Due Process afforded to civilians.

Some Representatives have sent letters to the Senate requesting the red-flag provisions be removed (here), even some of those who voted in favor of the Bill. Why they voted in favor of a Bill containing this language should be concerning for all their constituents.


Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on print


  • David Somerset
    Posted at 12:40h, 27 May Reply

    Read the Civil Rights Act of 1866 and the Fourteenth Amendment.

    Rep. Davis is no better than Speaker Nancy Pelosi, et. al. treasonous representatives.

  • cynthia
    Posted at 13:35h, 27 May Reply

    Thank you for exposing the truth.

  • Patriotic American
    Posted at 13:48h, 27 May Reply

    I don’t see Kinzinger on the list of signers.

  • Dave
    Posted at 14:50h, 27 May Reply

    You have the constitutionally protected right of free speech too, But if you speak out in ranks, you’ll be punished.

  • Dave
    Posted at 15:34h, 27 May Reply

    WatchDogs, for your consideration. I think Congress has constitutional authority to ban guns in federal enclaves and military bases. Over the federal enclaves, Congress has constitutional authority to make gun rules for the military: Pursuant to Article I, Section 8, next to last clause, Congress is granted “exclusive Legislation” over the District of Columbia, military bases, dock-Yards, and other places purchased with the consent of the State Legislatures (to carry out the enumerated powers). Article I, Section 8, clause 14 grants to Congress the power to make Rules for the government and regulation of Military Forces. Accordingly, for the specific geographical areas described at Article I, Section 8, next to last clause, and in US military facilities everywhere, Congress has the authority to make rules contrary to the 2nd amendment, NOT for the country at large just for those geographical areas and in the regulation of government and military forces, those expressly granted by the US Constitution.

    Now having said that, it is troublesome to me when anyone is denied a due process.
    Since I have no military experience, I will not judge the military or congress for such for such a denial. It may be necessary; I just don’t have a basis concluding one way or another.
    I appreciate what you guys do!

    • John Kraft & Kirk Allen
      Posted at 15:45h, 27 May Reply

      I understand what you are saying, but this takes it a step further: it applies off the military base and off of federal property, and local authorities are required to comply with the order and the servicemembers cannot appeal to local or state courts on any decisions made under this Bill.
      I have decades of military experience and cannot remember anytime where this type of power was granted to military commanders/judges to wield their authority off of a military installation – and not be subject to local/state court jurisdiction(s).

      • Dave
        Posted at 16:10h, 27 May Reply

        Now that definitively sounds contrary to the US Constitution. Any congressman who aligned with such an unconstitutional provision should be voted out of office!

  • Hugh Askew
    Posted at 17:34h, 27 May Reply

    My question is, how did these two congressional districts get combined if Illinois’ population was grossly “underreported” by thousands?

  • Frank Miller
    Posted at 08:25h, 28 May Reply

    18 U.S. Code § 242 – Deprivation of rights under color of law – Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or to different punishments, pains, or penalties, on account of such person being an alien, or by reason of his color, or race, than are prescribed for the punishment of citizens, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.

  • Robert O Bogue
    Posted at 07:45h, 29 May Reply

    Rodney Davis’s Congressional District, District 13, covers Parts of St. Louis, Champaign and Springfield. Pandering to the left’s interest by removing firearms from servicemen shouldn’t be a surprise. Don’t vote for him. Another example of an Illinois Politian, paid all too well, as he steals your firearm rights, with his head parked were the Sun doesn’t shine.
    The facts are simple, Illinois leads the nation with stupid unenforceable laws. More and more restrictions in fire arm ownership her in Illinois equal more and more deaths of innocent citizens. As I said, imposing un-enforceable restrictive Laws doesn’t fix anything. Look at Illinois cities like Chicago, St., Louis and even Champaign in your District. There’s plenty of data. Go ahead. Take a stroll after sundown in any of these cities with your peace sign. Good luck.
    Restricting the second amendment in any form, only works for the criminals, not for the honest citizen.. It’s time Illinois politicians stool up for our second amendment rights as provided in the U. S, Constitution and quit trying to undercut it’s greatest provisions. Rodney, you need to read our Constitution and just follow the law. Too simple.

  • GW ONE
    Posted at 11:42h, 02 June Reply

    It’s impossible to disagree with any of the well thought, well written comments stated above. Davis recently voted in favor of a “red flag” provision which is the best evidence that
    he wants to erode the 2nd Amendment. Check Davis’s voting record and you will find that he’s a waffler. He votes for what is good for himself, not the conservatives he is suppose
    to represent. Not only does Davis need to read the Constitution, he should also read the Federalist Papers. Davis’s stance on guns is troubling – so are his campaign adds targeting
    Mary Miller. Davis’s primary opponent. In a time when voters deserve solutions to serious problems Davis, using K Street donations, has allowed campaign commercials to run on network TV that are not accurate or truthful. His commercials are scandalous and don’t speak well for Davis. Mary Miller, a real, honest conservative, is in total support of the military, and a staunch 2nd Amendment advocate, the end to illegal emigrants freely crossing our borders. Davis’s first trip to the “border” was to film a clip standing near what was purported to be the border wall. His attempt at talking about border security is about as dishonest as campaign mailers that indicate President Trump supports him in the primary against Miller. Personally, I’m tired of political pretenders – like Davis. The simply truth is President Trump has clearly and openly endorsed Mary Miller.

Post A Comment