Understanding what constitutes a lawful order is important for both civilians and those in positions of authority. This post will explore the key aspects that define a lawful order and provide examples.

What is required for an order to be lawful?

For an order to be considered lawful, it must meet certain criteria:

• Issued by a legitimate authority: The person giving the order must have proper legal authority over the recipient. This could include managers, supervisors, police officers, military officers, etc. depending on the situation.
  
• Reasonable: The order cannot require the recipient to perform an unsafe, unethical, or illegal act. It must be something a reasonable person would perceive as a legitimate job duty or legal command within the context.
  
• Clear instructions: A lawful order must state clearly and precisely what actions are expected to be taken by the recipient. Ambiguous or vague commands that could reasonably be subject to misinterpretation may not meet the standard of being lawful.
  
• Given respectfully: While the order does not need to be politely worded, it cannot constitute verbal abuse, harassment, or any other disrespectful language that could make the recipient reasonably perceive it as unreasonable. Tone and wording must convey a legitimate command, not a personal attack.
  
• Within the authority’s scope: The person giving the order can only require actions that fall within the normal expectations and guidelines of their position. A supervisor cannot lawfully order an employee to do something completely unrelated to their job duties.

What is a direct order in the military?

In the military context, a direct order is a very specific type of lawful order that must be strictly obeyed:

Direct orders differ in that disobeying them can result in criminal charges under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, such as failure to obey a lawful general order or disobeying the order of a superior commissioned officer.

Some key aspects of a direct order in the military:

• Issued verbally most often by a senior non-commissioned officer or officer to a subordinate.
  
• Must be clear, and definitive, and leave no room for discretion or questioning by the recipient.
  
• Completing the directed action is prioritized above all other duties at that moment.
  
• Cannot circumvent or contradict other regulations, laws, or military doctrine. Safety must not be compromised.
  
• Failure to immediately comply can result in court-martial and criminal penalties under the UCMJ.

What is a lawful order in California?

California further defines lawful orders within its state:

In California, a lawful order is reasonably related to an employee’s work responsibilities and is not unsafe, unethical, or illegal.

Some key examples of lawful orders in California include:

• Completing normal job tasks and assignments within an employee’s job description.
  
• Following reasonable safety protocols and procedures.
  
• Abiding by conduct policies in an employee handbook like dress codes or anti-harassment rules.
  
• Cooperating with lawful workplace investigations.
  

Orders that jeopardize someone’s health, require breaking the law, or inflict emotional abuse would not be considered lawful. California also protects employees’ rights to disclose information about illegal workplace activities under certain whistleblower laws.

What is a lawful order in Florida?

Florida’s definition of a lawful order is similar to other states with some nuanced differences:

Under Florida law, a lawful and legal order is a directive given by a person in a position of authority to a subordinate that is reasonably related to their job requirements.

As in other locations:

• The order must be given by a supervisor or person with legitimate authority over the recipient.
  
• It cannot require illegal, unsafe, or unethical actions to be taken.
  

Unique to Florida, an order that violates an individual’s civil rights or causes unjustified disparate treatment based on a protected class like gender would not be considered lawful.

Any orders that surpass the scope of typical job duties for that position and demand after-hours compliance without compensation may raise questions about their lawful validity.