The Inaugural Oath: Chief Justice Slip-Up

United States Constitution

I guess Chief Justice Roberts isn’t as much of a strict constructionist as we had all assumed:

‘The oath is contained in the Constitution: “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

But when Roberts swore in Obama, he flipped some of the words, saying: “I will execute the office of president to the United States faithfully.” ‘ via ABC News.

A friend, after watching the flubbed oath yesterday, worried that some might challenge the legitimacy of Obama’s ascension to the Presidency given that he was improperly sworn in.

3 comments

  1. Jerry Smolin

    Apparently, there can be “do overs” for inaugural oaths. I think it was the NY Times, or maybe The Daily Beast, that noted the possibility of a “challenge” and cited a prior instance when an oath was re-taken. Then again, I doubt the people who challenged Obama’s citizenship are ready to give up trying to find silly challenge premises just because the Supreme Court shot down their first plan.

    Like

  2. Owen

    Someone is taking it seriously: CNN is reporting that Roberts got a do-over and re-administered the oath to Obama today.

    Like

  3. Charles

    And Drudge responded to the do-over with a giant headline that a bible was not used the second time as though that was a problem. If you check the Constitution, though, you find that there is no requirement that a bible be used and that the word god does not appear anywhere in the oath. Another (often forgotten) section of the Constitution states that no federal office holder can ever be required to meet any religious test.

    Like