What is the Meaning of an Oath?

What is the Meaning of an Oath?

All elected officials take an oath of office.  In every instance that I know of the Oath speaks to the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution of the united States, and the commitment of the office holder to “protect and defend the Constitution of the united States, and of this state against all enemies foreign and domestic.”  I doubt that any of my peers take the oath lightly, but I question if some understand what it says.

This oath does not have an expiration date, nor does it excuse the failure of the oath taker to observe the objects of its commitment.  We must be diligent to act in the defense of our oath when we observe actions that threaten our Constitutions, for the enemies, both foreign and domestic, will use whatever means necessary to facilitate our demise.

Who is the enemy?  Any person or body of people who act to subvert, ignore or override our Constitutions, for it is our nation that is protected by these documents.

In a very well written article that appears in Breitbart.com on big government, and which was a banner article on the DrudgeReport TJ McCann takes on the subject through the lens of a Congress that clear does not understand the limits of their power to give up power.  Again, we go back to the origins of power in this nation.  It comes from the People, a small amount given to the States in the form of representation, which in turn has given an even smaller portion to the Federal representation.  This ought to be a simple concept, but one which the blow-hard experts in DC can’t grasp.

Just as the Executive does not have the authority to arbitrarily and capriciously write legislation [in the form of executive orders], so the Congress does not have the Constitutional authority to hand over legislative authority to the executive branch.  We the People have not permitted it and the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution does not provide for it.  Therefore, in the fantastic words of the Court in Shelby v Norton County, “An unconstitutional act is not a law; it confers no rights; it imposes no duties; it affords no protection; it creates no office; it is in legal contemplation as inoperative as though it had never been passed.” Norton v. Shelby County, 118 U.S. 425 (1886)

I support Senator Jeff Sessions in his work to hold the line on his oath and to hold both Congress and the President accountable for their action that are in direct opposition to the Constitution of the united States and to their oaths of office.

Republished from Breitbart.com

The Breitbart article discusses  a letter by Senator Jeff Sessions (R-Alabama) to Obama, addressing what Obama is hiding in the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP), and will be kept hidden by fast-tracking the legislation via the Trade Promotion Authority (TPA), which the Senate has already voted in favor of!

Sessions letter indicates:

“Under fast-track, Congress transfers its authority to the executive and agrees to give up several of its most basic powers.”
“These concessions include: the power to write legislation, the power to amend legislation, the power to fully consider legislation on the floor, the power to keep debate open until Senate cloture is invoked, and the constitutional requirement that treaties receive a two-thirds vote.

“The latter is especially important since, having been to the closed room to review the secret text of the Trans-Pacific Partnership, it is clear it more closely resembles a treaty than a trade deal.

“In other words, through fast-track, Congress would be pre-clearing a political and economic union before a word of that arrangement has been made available to a single private citizen.
“The letter, which received no reply, asked several fundamental questions Congress ought to have answered before even considering whether to grant the executive such broad new powers,” Sessions wrote to Obama on Friday referencing his previous letter. “Among those, I asked that you make public the section of the TPP that creates a new transnational governance structure known as the Trans-Pacific Partnership Commission. The details of this new governance commission are extremely broad and have the earmarks of a nascent European Union, with many similarities.

“Reviewing the secret text, plus the secret guidance document that accompanies it, reveals that this new transnational commission – chartered with a ‘Living Agreement’ clause – would have the authority to amend the agreement after its adoption, to add new members, and to issue regulations impacting labor, immigration, environmental, and commercial policy.

“Under this new commission, the Sultan of Brunei would have an equal vote to that of the United States.”

Essentially, what the Senate has already agreed to do, and Obama is pushing to do, involves a “treaty” that overthrows the Constitution, and gives up authority that Congress cannot give up, and the President cannot acquire, without an amendment to the Constitution!

This is clearly indicated by the “Supremacy Clause” of Article VI, Clause 2  in the U.S. Constitution, which stipulates:

Supremacy Clause:

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be madeunder the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding.

Those Treaties made that are not in agreement with the Constitution, are not made “under the authority of the United States”, as no authority is given those making the treaty, the President, to violate and alter the Constitution!  What Obama is intending is a gross violation of the Constitution, and overthrow of our form of government!

The real THREAT (and it is a severe threat) is that most politicians, Senators, and Americans (and Obama) don’t recognize that the authority for Treaties does NOT free them up from the limitations of the Constitution.  They have no authority to make treaties that subvert the Constitution, that put another authority over Americans, and give up the authority of Congress …. but that is what they INTEND to do!  

If you do a Google search and survey the articles on TPP, many of those referencing the “Supremacy Clause” and treaties totally fail to recognize that those Treaties are still constrained by the limits of the Supremacy Clause!    If such treaties  ignoring the Constitution are negotiated, and voted on by Congress, and signed by POTUS, then they technically should be entirely invalid at face value, unconstitutional, due to imposing on Americans an authority that is not of this country and not congruent with the Constitution.  Those government representatives who promote these treaties cannot possibly be operating “under the authority of the Constitution”.  Those representatives cannot assume an authority for a treaty that the Constitution itself prohibits them.

However, despite this, they are taking a shot at bypassing and overthrowing the Constitution by a weak and poorly understood portion of the Constitution — the Supremacy Clause of Article VI, Clause 2.


This post was written by

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *