Maggie Goodlander

Although a grand jury in Washington declined to indict the six, Goodlander got texts from constituents and “a frantic phone call from my mom,” she said in an interview Wednesday.

The first-termer, who previously worked at the Justice Department under former President Joe Biden, was stunned the Trump administration would try to bring criminal charges against her and her fellow members of Congress.

“Everything about this should shock the conscience of every freedom-loving American from start to finish,” said Goodlander, who argued the decision by the six Democrats to state an “uncontroversial bedrock principle of American law” had caused Trump “to become so unglued that he directed the Justice Department to investigate us, to prosecute us, to even hang us, and then to have followed through on it in the way that they did.”

Indeed, Trump has publicly suggested the six Democrats should be executed for treason for releasing the video in November. Jeanne Pirro — a longtime cable TV host and Trump ally who is now the US attorney for the District of Columbia — recently authorized federal prosecutors to seek grand jury indictments of them, according to the Times, on the grounds they violated federal law that prohibits undermining the morale or discipline of military members by urging insubordination. The charges can result in prison sentences of up to 10 years.

Even though the attempt failed, it was a remarkable development, given that federal grand juries almost never reject prosecutors’ cases for indictments. Still, the move represents a drastic escalation in the administration’s campaign against the six Democrats, which has reshaped the realities of working in Congress, and life outside it, for all of them.

Goodlander had to hire legal representation to deal with the fallout. She said she is considering starting a legal defense fund, like Senator Mark Kelly of Arizona, who also participated in the video. (Kelly, a retired Navy captain, is suing Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth for trying to demote his rank and retirement benefits.)

“I’m going to do everything I have to do to make sure that we prevail in all of this,” Goodlander said. “But this has not been — you know, I have not raised $1 from this so far. I haven’t sent out fund-raising emails, because this is just so sad to me that this is happening, and it’s an outrage.”

She has also not ruled out pursuing legal action in response to the Trump administration’s moves. “I will keep every option on the table,” she said.

Goodlander is no stranger to public life and the risks that now accompany it. Her husband, Jake Sullivan, has been a high-ranking Democratic aide who most recently was national security adviser to Biden.

But Goodlander said the current situation is unique. In addition to legal threats, there have been threats to her safety and that of her staff: in November, local and state police responded to a bomb threat at her office in Concord, which was later determined not to be credible.

“When the president of the United States calls you out, targets you, incites violence against you, it is unlike anything else I’ve ever seen before,” she said. “The impacts are immediate. They are acute.”

The Justice Department has not commented on the news of the grand jury proceedings. It did not respond to an inquiry from the Globe.

The other Democrats in the video were Senator Elissa Slotkin of Michigan, and Representatives Jason Crow of Colorado, Chrissy Houlahan of Pennsylvania, and Chris Deluzio of Pennsylvania.

All served in military or national security government roles, Goodlander as an intelligence officer in the Naval Reserves.

In the video, posted online on Nov. 18, they took turns reading from a statement. “Right now, the threats to our Constitution aren’t just coming from abroad, but from right here at home,” they said. “Our laws are clear: You can refuse illegal orders. . . . You must refuse illegal orders.”

The message came as Trump officials drew widespread scrutiny for ordering the military to carry out lethal strikes on boats in the Caribbean Sea, which they alleged were engaged in drug smuggling. Many legal observers have argued the strikes were illegal acts that in some cases violated the military’s rules of engagement and may have killed innocent civilians.

Trump and top officials were livid over the video. Many Republicans argued it was inappropriate for the Democrats to openly call for service members to disobey orders. Back home, Goodlander faced harsh criticism from Republicans in New Hampshire.

But the administration’s decision to prosecute the lawmakers for their speech drew backlash even from Trump allies. Senator Tim Sheehy, a Montana Republican, told Punchbowl News on Wednesday that “the video was stupid and the attempt to indict them was stupid, too.”

Speaker Mike Johnson, however, defended the administration’s move to indict his colleagues. (Goodlander said the comments were “shocking, but sadly unsurprising.”)

The indictment and its timing may have stunned the Democrats, but it had been clear the Justice Department was moving to meet Trump’s demand for prosecution. Last week, several of the lawmakers confirmed they were approached by the Justice Department for voluntary interviews related to the video. None agreed to speak.

At a press conference Wednesday, Kelly and Slotkin rejected the suggestion they should have sat down with federal investigators. Asked if the administration might not have moved to indict so quickly had they engaged, Goodlander said, “This is such an unprincipled and outrageous inquiry that I have no idea.”

The indictment is part of a trend for the Justice Department, which Trump in his second term has purged of many career professionals and restocked with loyalists who have targeted his political opponents.

Last year, prosecutors secured indictments of New York Attorney General Letitia James, who oversaw Trump’s felony convictions in 2024, and former FBI director James Comey, with whom the president has feuded over the years. But in both cases, federal judges dismissed the charges.

As Slotkin noted to Capitol reporters on Wednesday, she and her colleagues could have easily found themselves in a different situation. “If things had gone a different way, we’d be preparing for arrest,” she said.

The Democrats have no idea what, if any, charges the administration could pursue next.

“We hope that the news today is the end of the investigation, but hope is not a strategy,” said Slotkin, a former CIA analyst. “The president could easily watch this press conference” and “kick off another cycle of physical intimidation and legal intimidation.”

Goodlander agreed.

“For all we know, they could be presenting before another federal grand jury right now,” she said. “That’s the power that they have as federal prosecutors. And the system was not designed for this kind of abuse, but I think the system has been tested, and it’s an extraordinary thing that ordinary American citizens sitting as a grand jury stood up for the Constitution, stood up for the truth, against these outrageous abuses.”