"How far is the military likely to go in resisting orders given by Trump? The answer depends a great deal on the individual service member and the context. Troops are taught to disobey orders to commit war crimes in the course of their duties, for example, but as legal historian Tom Dannenbaum points out, they have not typically had the right to question the terms of their deployments, even when those terms themselves-such as Russia's aggressive war against Ukraine-clearly violate international law. Thus, under existing customary law, it would be more likely for troops to conscientiously resist orders to commit atrocities than orders to deploy per se, even in violation of the Posse Comitatus Act. Second, troops are not required to disobey every questionable order, allowing a muddled grey area that makes it unreasonable to think there would be 100 percent compliance with this doctrine. In legal terms, according to military historian Mark Osiel, the barometer for "manifestly unlawful" orders is whether the order is "illegal on its face" -that is, whether an ordinary person would know that what they are doing is wrong. This is reflected in the procedural rules for court martial. But social scientists predict men and women in uniform vary in how they understand the threshold for "manifest unlawfulness" because they can easily talk themselves into excusing actions based on contextual factors."