It’s Official: SCOTUS Home Page

 

A screenshot from Saturday evening, October 6, 2018.

If you clicked on “Oath Ceremony – Photos,” you saw both Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Kennedy administering an oath to Justice Kavanaugh. This is because they take two oaths: the Constitutional Oath, followed by the Judicial Oath. It is worth considering the brief histories, and the words of the oaths, in light of the outrageous smear campaign that is not over yet. If jurists truly lived by their oaths, why would there be such a war over a particular vacancy?


The Constitutional Oath

As noted below in Article VI, all federal officials must take an oath in support of the Constitution:

“The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.”

The Constitution does not provide the wording for this oath, leaving that to the determination of Congress. From 1789 until 1861, this oath was, “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the Constitution of the United States.” During the 1860s, this oath was altered several times before Congress settled on the text used today, which is set out at 5 U. S. C. § 3331. This oath is now taken by all federal employees, other than the President:

“I, _________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith 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 Judicial Oath

The origin of the second oath is found in the Judiciary Act of 1789, which reads “the justices of the Supreme Court, and the district judges, before they proceed to execute the duties of their respective offices” to take a second oath or affirmation. From 1789 to 1990, the original text used for this oath (1 Stat. 76 § 8) was:

“I, _________, do solemnly swear or affirm that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as _________, according to the best of my abilities and understanding, agreeably to the constitution and laws of the United States. So help me God.”

In December 1990, the Judicial Improvements Act of 1990 replaced the phrase “according to the best of my abilities and understanding, agreeably to the Constitution” with “under the Constitution.” The revised Judicial Oath, found at 28 U. S. C. § 453, reads:

“I, _________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as _________ under the Constitution and laws of the United States. So help me God.”


A final thought: look at the photograph of Justice Kavanaugh taking the Constitutional Oath. Pray for his family, with their images in mind. They all need both divine and human support. Then, go vote, to punish the evildoers and reinforce the ranks of those, who will protect this good man, his family, and our Constitution, against the leftist mobs — both virtual and physical.

Published in Politics
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 32 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Leigh Inactive
    Leigh
    @Leigh

    formerlawprof (View Comment):
    But a little-known fact of Supreme Court life is that 9-0, 8-1, and 7-2 decisions make up well over 75% of the cases.

    Which is why the talking point that Kavanaugh and Merrick Garland voted the same way some 90% of the time (obviously not on the Supreme Court) isn’t a big deal.  There’s some large percentage where any two random judges are going to come down the same, and Garland wasn’t as far left as some.  It’s just that the remaining 10% are extremely important.

    • #31
  2. Clifford A. Brown Member
    Clifford A. Brown
    @CliffordBrown

    President Trump’s remarks start at 32:50.

    • #32
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.