I Solemnly Swear to Never Play Smart Ever Again

Federal employees, Representatives, Senators, judges, political appointees, and the President and Vice President of the United States accept an oath of office. So what does taking an oath mean? Why fifty-fifty do it?

The reason is uncomplicated — public servants are just that — servants of the people. After much fence about an Oath, the framers of the U. Due south. Constitution included the requirement to take an Adjuration of Part in the Constitution itself. Article Half dozen of the Constitution says "The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the Us and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Examination shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Role or public Trust under the The states." The Constitution does not prescribe the actual text of the Article VI oaths. For federal civil service employees, the oath is fix along by law in 5 U.Southward. Code § 3331, which reads as follows:

"An individual, except the President, elected or appointed to an function of honor or profit in the ceremonious service or uniformed services, shall take the following adjuration: "I, ___, practise solemnly swear (or assert) that I will back up and defend the Constitution of the United states of america against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I volition bear truthful organized religion and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.""

The President is too required by the Constitution to accept an Oath of Role. Article 2, Section one, of the U.s.a. Constitution prescribes the Oath. It says "I practice solemnly swear (or affirm) that I volition faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the all-time of my power, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United states of america."

The Oaths are relatively straightforward, merely what do they mean? I see the oath as having 3 of import aspects. First, the employee swears to back up and defend the Constitution against enemies. 2nd, south/he swears allegiance to the Constitution. Finally, the employee promises to do his/her job well.

Federal workers ofttimes hear a career supervisor or political appointee talking about loyalty to the agency or the dominate. One purpose of the Adjuration of Function is to remind federal workers that they practise non swear fidelity to a supervisor, an agency, a political appointee, or even to the President. The oath is to support and defend the U.South. Constitution and faithfully execute your duties. The intent is to protect the public from a government that might autumn victim to political whims and to provide a North Star — the Constitution — as a source of direction. Other laws take been enacted that support that view. For instance, in 1939, Congress passed and President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed the Hatch Act. We call it that today, simply the bodily name of the law is "An Deed to Prevent Pernicious Political Activities."

The Adjuration does not remove ambivalence and it is not always easy for an employee to know what to practice. Here are a few examples:

• Lawful orders. Let's say someone in authority gives a federal worker a lawful order that s/he does non concur with. That disagreement might be for ethical reasons, differences in policy direction, or other reasons. Federal employees are required to follow lawful orders, even if they disagree with them.
• Unlawful orders. 5 USC 2302(b) (9)(D) gives employees the right to refuse unlawful orders. Refusing an unlawful gild is not easy. The employee may face significant pressure level to carry out an order that s/he knows is unlawful. Most employees never accept the experience of being given an unlawful society. In the few cases it has happened to me, an explanation to my boss that what I was asked to practice was illegal was sufficient and the matter was dropped. If it had not been enough, my but adequate course would exist to refuse to carry out the order. Doing something illegal because y'all are "just following orders" is not a viable defense.
• Regulatory violations. What happens when an order violates a regulation or rule, but is not technically illegal? A 2015 Merit Systems Protection Lath decision answered that question. MSPB outlined the bug in the instance, writing "Specifically, the appellant asserted that the bureau violated v U.S.C. § 2302(b) (9)(D), which protects employees from retaliation "for refusing to obey an order that would crave the private to violate a law." five The statesC. § 2302(b) (9)(D). He alleged that the agency improperly stripped him of particular task duties and gave him a subpar performance rating for disobeying an gild that would take required that he violate (i) a Federal Acquisition Regulation that limits the authorisation of a contracting officer's representative (COR), and (ii) "PA296: How to be a COR," the agency's training grade for COR certification, which further clarifies the limitations to this say-so." MSPB's final decision said " … we hold that the correct-to-disobey provision at section 2302(b) (9)(D) extends only to orders that would require the individual to take an action barred past statute. Because the appellant in this case contends that he disobeyed an order that would have required him to violate an agency rule or regulation, his merits falls outside of the telescopic of department 2302(b) (9)(D)." That meant a manager could field of study or fifty-fifty remove an employee for declining to carry out an order that violated a regulation but not a constabulary. In response, Congress changed the law to include violation of a rule or regulation, and then employees can refuse orders that violate a rule or regulation.
• Other situations.The oath of office and most example law practice not grant any protection for deciding that an order is a bad idea, bad policy, or morally wrong. In fact, the oath does non grant whatsoever protection from annihilation. It is an oath of fidelity and a promise to benefit work. Employees who believe they are existence ordered to deed in a manner inconsistent with their oath of role may pursue other options, such every bit whistleblower complaints, contacting their Senators or Representatives or their organization's Inspector Full general, or whatever other avenue provided by police force or regulation. Disobeying directly orders is generally not i of the available options. That means an employee who wants to contend that s/he is adhering to the oath of office by disobeying orders has a very tough colina to climb. At that place is likewise the selection of going to the press, but that tin can bring its ain set of risks. It is up to individual employees to determine how much risk they are willing to assume.

Federal workers are answerable to the people. Whether an employee was a Trump supporter or a Biden supporter, a supporter of another candidate, or someone who chooses non to vote at all is not relevant to the oath of allegiance to the Constitution. Nor is information technology relevant to the promise to exercise a good job. Virtually federal employees are highly professional. They empathise their adjuration of part and accept it seriously. Even though many political appointees in every Assistants do non recognize the professionalism of federal workers on the twenty-four hour period they accept their own adjuration of office, as their feel with federal workers increases, in previous Administrations they have come to recognize the vital role federal employees play.

I have been hearing more and more from people who say that federal workers should back up the President more, or that federal workers should actively work against the President. I heard that to a lesser degree in previous Administrations besides. Neither is true. Federal workers should do their jobs, obey the police, and behave out their oath to back up and defend the Constitution. That is what most of the American people wait and deserve from their public servants.

riddleshaterecer.blogspot.com

Source: https://chiefhro.com/2021/01/04/the-oath-of-office-and-what-it-means-2/