Smoky Mountains Sunrise

Wednesday, January 21, 2009

Will A Re-Do Make Him Legitimate?


We question whether any ceremonial formula will make "that one" legitimate, but some suggest he may not be President yet!


Did Obama Actually Get Sworn In? New President May Have To Re-Take Oath After 'Flub'

From The Daily Mail

It was the constitutional equivalent of a wardrobe malfunction.

But, minor as it appeared, it may be that the 1.8million spectators in Washington yesterday didn't actually witness Barack Obama being sworn in.

With his hand on the Lincoln Bible, held by his beaming wife, Mr Obama took the presidential oath of office yesterday - and flubbed it.

Flub: Barack Obama takes the oath given by Chief Justice John Roberts, Jr. (lower R) - but was it legitimate?

Flub: Barack Obama takes the oath given by Chief Justice John Roberts, Jr. (lower R) - but was it legitimate?

First, he began to repeat the 35-word oath before the Chief Justice reciting it had finished his line.

But the pair recovered safely from that gaffe - only to misquote the oath.

It wasn't Mr Obama's fault - Chief Justice John G. Roberts transposed the words, and Mr Obama merely repeated them.

He should have said he will 'faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States'. Instead, following the Chief Justice's lead, he said he will 'execute the office of the President of the United States faithfully'.

Constitutional law experts speaking to the Washington Post agreed that the gaffe was insignificant.

Even so, it could cause a legal headache. Two previous presidents - Calvin Coolidge and Chester A. Arthur - have had to repeat the oath privately because of similar issues.

Lawyers said Mr Obama need not be worried about the legitimacy of his presidency - but they also said a do-over couldn't hurt, the Post reported.

Charles Cooper, a former Ronald Reagan legal official, said that the incorrect recitation should be fixed - and that he would be surprised if it hadn't already happened.

It was the first time Chief Justice Roberts had administered the oath - and, coincidentally of course, the first time in history that any Chief Justice has administered the oath to a president who voted against his confirmation.




No comments: