Those who make it to the final stage of selection for the Army’s Delta Force special operations unit must pass a commander’s board interview. There, Delta’s commanding officer and other unit personnel barrage the candidate with various questions to test his intellect and character under pressure. I’ve been told by former Delta personnel and have read in at least one memoir that one frequent question is: “How would you respond to an order by the president of the United States to kill a political opponent?”

It can be presumed that a similar question is asked in the selection process for candidates to join the Naval Special Warfare Development Group, also known as SEAL Team Six, and the Air Force‘s 24th Special Tactics Squadron. These organizations constitute Joint Special Operations Command’s three combat-focused special mission units.

This bears noting in light of Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor‘s dissent to Monday’s ruling on presidential immunity. Sotomayor posits what the decision would mean for a president who “Orders the Navy’s Seal Team 6 to assassinate a political rival?” She answers: “Immune” from prosecution.

Sotomayor’s contention is both intellectually disingenuous and legally flawed. It shows an utterly defective understanding of military professionalism. It also ignores the majority opinion’s express reservation of judicial review for presidential actions which constitute acts of “authority without law.” No serious legal scholar would claim that a president has the legal authority to kill a domestic political opponent. Established law on what constitutes lawful orders includes the stipulation that an order is pursuant to a “military duty” — plainly a domestic political assassination is a political and criminal act. Still, Sotomayor’s inventive conspiracy has sparked fear by some that former President Donald Trump could order SEAL Team Six to kill off his political enemies if he returns to office.

That brings us back to the Delta Force commander’s board question.

Because the answer to that question, at least if you want to retain a shot at passing the commander’s board, is not “I would follow said order.” On the contrary, it is a variation on the theme of “I would refuse the directive on grounds it constitutes an unlawful order” or “I would consult Joint Special Operations Command legal adviser.” The rationale for this question is simple: Delta wants thinkers who can fight, not zombies who can pull triggers. It wants operators with moral confidence and competence who understand that they serve under a constitutional legal structure rather than as heirs to the corrupt traditions of 1st-century-onward Praetorian Guard units. In essence, Delta, DEVGRU, and 24th STS want and provide the exact opposite of what Sotomayor apparently believes they want and provide.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

The point of respect bears a final note here. Delta’s success at recruiting and developing talent has led to its widely regarded status as the world’s foremost special operations force — Delta operators are particularly notorious for their innovative versatility and close-quarter battle skills. But getting into Delta is not easy — fewer than 10%, often around 5%, of each selection-training course will eventually pass out of the Operator Training Course and join the unit. A similar story applies to the 24th STS and DEVGRU. For a Supreme Court justice to defame one special mission unit as a bunch of traitors-in-waiting is to defame them all.

It’s embarrassing.