By Patrick Canning
On February 10 and again on February 17, Beaufort City Councilman Mitch Mitchell stood outside City Hall protesting and speaking to the press while wearing his U.S. Air Force uniform.
Many people with military experience immediately understand why this matters. Others may reasonably ask, “Who cares?”
To be clear, the issue is not that Mitchell spoke out. He is free to share his opinions, both as a private citizen and as a local elected official. The problem is that he did so while wearing his military uniform. That is a clear violation of official Department of Defense policy.
According to DoD Instruction 1334.01, service uniforms may not be worn during or in connection with political activities. This includes protests, rallies, or public statements intended to influence policy. The rule exists to preserve the military’s strict nonpartisan identity and applies to both active and retired members, regardless of political affiliation. Mitchell’s actions plainly violate this long-standing and well-understood policy.
The military uniform is not a personal costume. It does not belong to the individual. It represents service to the country as a whole, not to one political side. Wearing it to promote a political message, no matter how passionate or sincere, is simply not permitted.
This is not just a military matter. Beaufort’s city council is officially nonpartisan. Council members are elected to represent the entire community, not to act as political activists.
When an elected official uses both their public role and their military identity to support a partisan message, they cross a line. Mitchell may have acted out of personal conviction, but that does not make the action acceptable.
Ethical standards apply to everyone in public office. Following the rules is not optional. Shouldn’t the citizens of Beaufort expect better from their representatives?
At the March 11 city council meeting, I raised this concern during the public comment period. In response, Councilman Mitchell said he would wear his uniform whenever he pleased and confirmed that he wore it intentionally to make a statement. He also recorded video of my remarks using his phone from the dais, despite the fact that council meetings are already recorded in full through official audio and video channels. This felt less like documentation and more like intimidation.
But the content of his message is not the issue here. The rules are not dependent on whether someone feels strongly about a subject. They exist to protect the integrity of our public institutions and to prevent the appearance that the military is taking political sides.
No one is questioning Councilman Mitchell’s military service. His commitment to the country is not in dispute. What is in question is whether public officials can ignore long-standing laws and ethical guidelines when it suits them. If we allow that, we invite others to do the same.
The uniform could be used to support any political cause, from any direction. That would not just confuse the public, it would erode trust in both the military and in local government.
Mitchell is entitled to his opinions. But is he entitled to break important, long standing rules and then shrug off responsibility of breaking them?
Patrick Canning is a retired estimating engineer from Pennsylvania currently residing in Beaufort. When not attending city meeting, he is offering his time and effort through volunteering in the local community.
