Paradox Of The Soldier's Oath

[jcd11235 0]

I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.

and

I, _____ (SSAN), having been appointed an officer in the Army of the United States, as indicated above in the grade of _____ do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservations or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter; So help me God.

These are the oaths all us enlisted soldiers and commissioned officers (respectively) take. My question is simple:

What is the responsibility of a soldier or officer should the President be an enemy of the Constitution?

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[Tonto 1]

Presidents come and go.

The constitution remains. (Or rather should remain)

t

It's the year of the Pig.

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

Presidents come and go.

The constitution remains. (Or rather should remain)

t

I agree. However, that doesn't answer the question. I'm not implying we are in such a scenario. I am saying such a scenario is a real possibility, even if only in the future.

What is the responsibility of the soldier / officer?

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[Tonto 1]

I'm not an American or a soldier, so I won't presume to have an answer for your question.

I think that people know when there is a problem, and those people will always find a solution to that problem.

The US was formed over just such a paradox. They did the right thing then, and I'm sure if called upon, would do the right thing again.

t

It's the year of the Pig.

[Frenchy68 0]

Quote

...should the President be an enemy of the Constitution?

If I understand the amazing system of checks and balances that the US constitution offers, unconstitutionality can only be determined by the judicial branch (and not by members of the armed forces). Should the Supreme court rule that a President is violating the constitution, I would think that would be ground for impeachment, in which case the whole situation is a non issue, unless an inpeached president remains at the head of the armed forces, which I doubt he/she would.

"For once you have tasted Absinthe you will walk the earth with your eyes turned towards the gutter, for there you have been and there you will long to return."

[CDRINF 1]

"Enemy of the constitution" is a somewhat broad and subjective evaluation. As a soldier and officer, I don't get the option to act on subjective personal beliefs and feelings of morality, rightness and wrongness. In simple terms, I must obey all legal orders, and have a duty to disobey illegal orders.

If I have a problem with the subjective morality of an order, I can resign my commission. What I cannot do is disobey an order (say, deploy to Iraq, which I imagine is where this is going) given by a legal authority just because I don't agree with it. Some would say that makes me a mindless robot following orders. I say that's exactly what you want me to be. If you want me to act on my conscience, then what happens when my conscience does not agree with yours? If I don't agree with what the government says I should do, do I then take matters into my own hands and force a change, using the 900 armed men I have under my command? There are countries where that happens. We call them military dictatorships.

Bottom line, our country is built on respect for the law handed down by civilian authority. If the citizens think there is a problem with that authority, they need to take action at the ballot box.

CDR

[Skysurfer_Rob 0]

If a President becomes a threat and enemy to the constitution, it's the responsibility of the judicial and legislative branch to impeach the President. Once the impeachment process starts, the President is no longer the acting Commander in Chief.

In the end it's not our decision to make as a military, it's your decision to make as voters and citizens.

"Though I Fly Through the Valley of Death, I Shall Fear No Evil...For I am at 80,000 Feet and Climbing."
SR-71 hangar entrance sign at Kadena AFB, Japan

[StreetScooby 5]

Quote

What is the responsibility of a soldier or officer should the President be an enemy of the Constitution?

Excellent question.

Who gets to decide the President is the enemy of the Constitution?

Editted - I've read the other responses to this thread now. Sounds like the judicial branch makes this call.

We are all engines of karma

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

In simple terms, I must obey all legal orders, and have a duty to disobey illegal orders.

Suppose you receive an illegal order directly from the President?

[nanook 1]

If the Constitution falls, I'm no longer a member of the Service as the original contract is null and void. To continue to serve would be treason to the previous constitution. We swore to thePeople, not the President, not to that officer I said the oath to, that we will support and defend the U.S Constitution. That being said (with the only proof that the President becomes the Enemy is by voiding the Consitution, which is impossible.) The then Former President, now dictator will cease to be in my chain of command and thus he goes down.

_____________________________

"The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never know if they are genuine" - Abraham Lincoln

[CDRINF 1]

Quote

Suppose you receive an illegal order directly from the President?

Quote

Then I am duty bound by my oath to disobey it. The Constitution and the law trump the President.

Simple Example: Order: "You will not take prisoners. You will kill all enemy you capture." This is a violation of the UCMJ, U.S. and international law. I can be prosecuted for obeying this illegal order.

Murkier Example: Order: "You will deploy as a member of your unit and take part in the invasion of a sovereign nation deemed to be a threat to our security, and overthrow its government." Hmmm.... Okay, I might not agree with this particular action, but it is within the power of the commander in chief as commander of the armed forces. (We can argue for days about if he needs an actual declaration of war to employ the Armed Forces against threats to U.S. security, so I won't go there). The order, however, has at least the tacit blessing of the legislative branch in that they vote on a resolution to approve of this action, and continue to provide funding for it. Therefore, it is a legal order and I am duty bound to obey. If I have a personal problem with it, I can resign my commission.

CDR

• Quote

Share this post

---

Link to post

Share on other sites

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

Quote

...should the President be an enemy of the Constitution?

If I understand the amazing system of checks and balances that the US constitution offers, unconstitutionality can only be determined by the judicial branch (and not by members of the armed forces).

I can't find anything in the Constitution about the Judicial Branch having the authority to declare a President an enemy of the Constitution. Where exactly is this authority granted?

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

(say, deploy to Iraq, which I imagine is where this is going)

Not at all. I doubt our invasion of Iraq could be used to justify the CIC as an enemy of the Constitution.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

Once the impeachment process starts, the President is no longer the acting Commander in Chief.

Not true. The President is CIC until the impeachment process ends. President Clinton was impeached, but did not relinquish command of the US armed forces until President Bush was inaugurated.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

Suppose you receive an illegal order directly from the President?

The example I was thinking of was more along the lines of:

What if Congress passes legislation that the President signs, but refuses to execute/enforce. Let's say, for argument's sake, that the legislation specifically calls for the President to execute/enforce such legislation. Let's also say that the legislation pertains to a group immune from lawsuits, such that a case cannot be (ultimately) brought before the Supreme Court should the President fail to execute/enforce the legislation.

In other words, the President willfully circumvents the system of checks and balances built into the Constitution by withholding Congress's right to override a veto and by withholding the SCOTUS' authority to interpret the law.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

If the Constitution falls, I'm no longer a member of the Service as the original contract is null and void. To continue to serve would be treason to the previous constitution. We swore to thePeople, not the President, not to that officer I said the oath to, that we will support and defend the U.S Constitution. That being said (with the only proof that the President becomes the Enemy is by voiding the Consitution, which is impossible.) The then Former President, now dictator will cease to be in my chain of command and thus he goes down.

Just because the President is (hypothetically) an enemy of the Constitution does not mean the Constitution is fallen.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

The Constitution and the law trump the President.

This is exactly the kind of answer I was looking for. Thank you.

Let's say, hypothetically, the President was obviously an enemy of the Constitution for reasons that had nothing to do with the military. Do you wait for an impeachment process to be completed before denouncing the President's authority?

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[ExAFO 0]

Quote

Quote

The Constitution and the law trump the President.

This is exactly the kind of answer I was looking for. Thank you.

Let's say, hypothetically, the President was obviously an enemy of the Constitution for reasons that had nothing to do with the military. Do you wait for an impeachment process to be completed before denouncing the President's authority?

It depends on how you feel about being court-martialed in the interim.

Military folk give up certain constitutioal rights while in uniform.

Illinois needs a CCW Law. NOW.

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

The Constitution and the law trump the President.

This is exactly the kind of answer I was looking for. Thank you.

Let's say, hypothetically, the President was obviously an enemy of the Constitution for reasons that had nothing to do with the military. Do you wait for an impeachment process to be completed before denouncing the President's authority?

It depends on how you feel about being court-martialed in the interim.

Military folk give up certain constitutioal rights while in uniform.

Taking the oath also implies certain responsibilities.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[matthewcline 0]

And thus far each one who feels he had to "exercise" those responsibilities has been punished and effected the current admin zero percent.

It is the Judiciary Branch who has the responsibility to keep Congress and the President in check, but the Judiciary need us the PEOPLE to file a suit to challenge a particular law or action so they can act.

Checks and balances, not perfect, but better than mutiny and anarchy.

An Instructors first concern is student safety.
So, start being safe, first!!!

[ExAFO 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

The Constitution and the law trump the President.

This is exactly the kind of answer I was looking for. Thank you.

Let's say, hypothetically, the President was obviously an enemy of the Constitution for reasons that had nothing to do with the military. Do you wait for an impeachment process to be completed before denouncing the President's authority?

It depends on how you feel about being court-martialed in the interim.

Military folk give up certain constitutioal rights while in uniform.

Taking the oath also implies certain responsibilities.

Unless a servicemember fashions themselves the reincarnation of Billy Mitchell, it's not worth a trip to Leavenworth to be an emotional fluffer for the anti-establishment lobby.

Illinois needs a CCW Law. NOW.

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

And thus far each one who feels he had to "exercise" those responsibilities has been punished and effected the current admin zero percent.

It is the Judiciary Branch who has the responsibility to keep Congress and the President in check, but the Judiciary need us the PEOPLE to file a suit to challenge a particular law or action so they can act.

Checks and balances, not perfect, but better than mutiny and anarchy.

Had you read and understood the thread, I was raising a question about a hypothetical situation, not a current one.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

Unless a servicemember fashions themselves the reincarnation of Billy Mitchell, it's not worth a trip to Leavenworth to be an emotional fluffer for the anti-establishment lobby.

I would hope some service members would have the integrity to stand up for the Constitution when it is in conflict with the CIC.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[matthewcline 0]

You must be talking to Lucky too.

Yes, I have read and understood the thread.
Put reality into your Hypothetical world for a second, you'll see most are not willing to be interned to prison, the risk is not worth the reward. The SCOTUS will eventually charge and try the CIC or Congress or who ever (given the Hypothetical scene of course), when a case gets to them.

Military cases very rarely get to the SCOTUS, there usually is no standing for them. Most of the cases get broke down to a contract violation (if they are standing up to a hypothetical order).

I actually don't see a paradox in the oath, I see over analysis maybe.

Your local JAG will help you to stay out of trouble (go to the Defense side of the office), he or she can steer you to actual cases to use for educations sake.

They can also tell you how far you can go before you cross that line that has you up against the dreaded "treason" charges.

And if your not a member of the DOD it is mute, as there would be no conflict.

An Instructors first concern is student safety.
So, start being safe, first!!!

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

You must be talking to Lucky too.

I'm not sure what Lucky has to do with this discussion. Perhaps you could clarify?

Quote

Yes, I have read and understood the thread.
Put reality into your Hypothetical world for a second, you'll see most are not willing to be interned to prison, the risk is not worth the reward. The SCOTUS will eventually charge and try the CIC or Congress or who ever (given the Hypothetical scene of course), when a case gets to them.

Military cases very rarely get to the SCOTUS, there usually is no standing for them. Most of the cases get broke down to a contract violation (if they are standing up to a hypothetical order).

Again, you should read the thread, and pay attention to detail.

Quote

I actually don't see a paradox in the oath, I see over analysis maybe.

If you don't see what is paradoxical about taking an oath to defend the Constitution against all enemies, and obeying the orders of a CIC who is hypothetically an enemy of the Constitution, I can't help you to understand.

Quote

And if your not a member of the DOD it is mute, as there would be no conflict.

Absolutely not true. The conflict may not be mind, but it would still exist.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!