Legal News

Reading of the Presidential Oath, Take Two?

By Ashby Jones

We really didn’t think it’d come to this. But apparently, some constitutional scholars out there are suggesting that President Obama retake the presidential oath. Click here for the story, from the Washington Post.

Yesterday, as the whole television-watching world will recall, Obama and Chief Justice John Roberts did a botch job on the oath, which should have been read as it is written in the Constitution itself:

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 as we highlighted yesterday, the two did an awkward pas-de-deux, and President Obama wound up saying it differently from how the Constitution specifies. While it’s apparently true that Obama became president at the stroke of noon yesterday and didn’t need to say the oath to take office, the Constitution specifies that the incoming president say the oath as written before he or she can execute the powers of the office.

The presidential oath of office is required of a new president before he can execute his powers, and the Constitution is clear that its 35 words must be spoken exactly.

According to the WaPo, con-law experts agree that the mistake is relatively insignificant. Yet two previous presidents — Calvin Coolidge and Chester A. Arthur — repeated the oath privately because of similar issues.

Others told the Post that while Obama need not be concerned about the legitimacy of his presidency, “a do-over couldn’t hurt.” Charles Cooper, head of the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel under President Ronald Reagan, said that an incorrect recitation should be fixed and that he would be surprised if the oath had not already been re-administered.

Akhil Reed Amar, a Yale University professor of constitutional law, said, “Out of a super-abundance of caution, perhaps he should do it again.” Added Jonathan Turley, a professor of constitutional law at George Washington University: “He should probably go ahead and take the oath again,” Turley said. “If he doesn’t, there are going to be people who for the next four years are going to argue that he didn’t meet the constitutional standard.”

For his part, Obama seemed inclined to forgive and forget. ABC’s Robin Roberts asked Obama about the flub last night. According to a transcript provided by the White House, Obama responded:

We’re up there, we’ve got a lot of stuff on our mind, and he actually, I think, helped me out on a couple of stanzas there. So over all, I think it went relatively smoothly, and I’m very grateful to him.

Photo: AP

Full post as published by Law Blog - WSJ.com on January 21, 2009 (boomark / email).