“Here, the orders themselves are perfectly legal, nobody is questioning that. It is the issuing authority that is being questioned. And there is a world of difference there.”
If the issuing authority is proven to be illegal, then the orders that are issued by said authority are thus illegal.
Yep.
But the opposite also holds true does it not? Obama has been sworn in as per constitutional directive. He has been accepted and recognised as the POTUS by all branches of the government. What more would he actually be expected to do to have the military respect his orders? He has gone through all the ordinary ceremonies and legal processes as far as one can see. For all intents and purposes, there is no reason to legitimately suppose that he is not the President and thus the CinC. He has been legally installed into the office and thus the role of commander.
Sure, if it works out in civilian court that the President is not who he says he is (not that we will ever see it in court) then a soldier would be right to refuse the order. No question there. It just seems to me that all the normal ceremonies and procedures have been fullfilled and until a credible civilian authority (i.e. The Supreme Court or the Congress) can demonstrate the illegitimacy of the current CinC, then soldiers ought to obey his orders as long as those orders themselves are legal (i.e. fall within the legal framework of orders).