"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."
On January 20th, our once-and-new president
will take an oath of office. It is short, specific, and traditional. He will
affirm his intention to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution. That’s
it—full stop.
There are some other duties outlined in the
Constitution. The President is Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy (it was
written before we needed an Air Force or a Space Force). S/He also commands the
militia of the several states when called into the actual service of the U.S.
For those who take an “originalist” view of the Constitution, one might
remember that in the late 1700s militias were made up of the local gentry.
Because the Framers wanted a “well regulated militia,” they gave people the
right to keep and bear arms.[i] Presidents
also appoint heads of executive departments, members of the Supreme Court, and
other important officials, with advice and consent of the Senate. We know this.
We learned it in the eighth grade and again in Civics and History
courses, but it’s worth repeating.
When a President-Elect chooses his/her Cabinet they have at
least two choices: Competent people who are loyal to the President or loyal people
who are competent or not so much. At face value, President-Elect Trump’s
choices are in the not-so-much category. Selections based on loyalty to him are
the first criterion. He and his MAGA movement scored the trifecta of the
electoral race: the presidency, and a majority in both houses of Congress. There
is a highly conservative majority in SCOTUS that leans in his direction.
It presents an opportunity for good or bad. If political survival
in the majority party of both houses of Congress requires fealty to a president,
it messages concern. Montesquieu championed the idea of three separate branches
of government. He noted that “The accumulation of all powers,
legislative, executive, and judiciary in the same hands, whether of one, a few,
or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed, or elective, may justly be
pronounced the very definition of tyranny.”[ii]
Yale professor Timothy Snyder wrote in 2017 that, “The
democracies that arose after the First World War (and the Second) often
collapsed when a single party seized power in some combination of an election
and a coup d’etat. A party emboldened by a favorable election result or
motivated by ideology, or both might change the system from within.”[iii]
The President-elect campaigned on a platform of
retribution, politicizing the Justice Department, or using the military against
the people of the country. We learned from his first administration that he
tends to do what he tells us he will do. Again, his Cabinet appointments seem
to be based on loyalty instead of competence, potentially a step toward
autocracy in the name of democracy, intended or not.
The President-elect has shown no lack of favoritism for
oligarchs. Elon Musk clings to the shirttails of power. Other oligarchs created
massive PACs to support the Trump election, as did a few for Harris. The
oligarchs own most of the wealth of the nation. Too many of us refuse to
acknowledge the reality of the massive wealth distributed among a few dozen
people. If they successfully get their claws into the governing fabric of the
country, democracy will shrink. You just can’t have a democracy ruled by oligarchs.
It never works.
The candidate for Secretary of Defense, for example, isn’t
qualified for the job based on his work experience. His appointment is scary
because of his disdain for the American system and his call for using the
military against citizens who disagree with the neo-nationalism philosophy. He
wears tattoos supporting white nationalism. His books call for divorcing red
states from the rest of America. If one is less MAGA than he is, they should be
concerned: “Whether you like it or not, you are an ‘infidel’ – an unbeliever –
according to the false religion of leftism. You can submit now or later, or you
can fight.”[iv] He
has stated that we are now in a post-Constitution period in our history. If he
believes that, one wonders if he will take the oath to support and defend the
Constitution.
The danger of one-party rule extends to the states as well.
Some states are letting officials determine what is taught in colleges, trying
to eliminate tenure for professors. Some states now require schools to teach
the Bible and promote Christian beliefs in opposition to the Constitution.
So what is one to do? We know that the nation is exhausted
from 24/7/365 politics. They have heard all they want to hear about how bad a
person Trump is, true or not. “Woe is me” isn’t especially useful.
We can, however, insist that those who take an oath to
defend and protect the Constitution do just that. Whenever someone acts against
their oath they should be brought to heel by the press, the Fourth
Estate. Individuals can write about it on X, on Facebook, Bluesky, or
even Instagram and TikTok. They can write to the local newspaper if they still
have one. They can be opposed in the next election.
What can we do about this? We need to pay attention to what
our leaders do, rather than just what they say. That applies at the local
school board level and at city hall or in the state capitol. Politicians react
to citizen reactions. They read their mail; they listen to the phone calls.
When they see a trend they move in that direction. Write to your
representatives at each level, leave phone messages, write to local newspapers,
respond to X messages, join your party’s local committee, and influence it to
support your objectives.
Let’s remember that all elected officials at the federal
level take an oath to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution. Let’s
make sure they do.
It’s about the Constitution. It isn’t about Trump.
[i] Second Amendment of the Constitution, “A well regulated
Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the
people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed". Note the
placement of the commas. Hamilton argued in The Federalist No.28 that, “For a
long time to come, it will not be possible to maintain a large army; and as the
means of doing this increase, the population and natural strength of the
community will proportionably increase.”
[ii] Montesquieu, Spirit of the Laws,
1748. Noted in The Federalist No 47. He also wrote that “The tyranny of a
prince in an oligarchy is not so dangerous to the public welfare as the apathy
of a citizen in a democracy.”
[iii] Timothy Snyder, On Tyranny –
Twenty Lessons from the Twentieth Century, Tim Dugan Books, 2017
[iv] The Guardian, Nov. 22, 2024, a
report on Pet
