The highest duty of an elected official
In the State of Washington, as in other states, elected state officials from the Governor on down swear to an oath of office. The oath for elected officials in Washington State starts “I do solemnly swear that I will support the Constitution of the United States…” Next, the elected official swears to support “the Constitution and laws of the State of Washington, and that they will faithfully discharge the duties of their office to the best of their abilities.” If an elected official is aware that there is a violation of the Constitution or its amendments, it is the primary duty of said elected official to act to on behalf of the people to defend the Constitution by any legal means necessary as stated in the oath they take. Unambiguous.
So, how best should an elected official proceed with such a powerful directive? By ignoring it? By asking permission or guidance of his or her party apparatus? By asking lobbyists clamoring for favor? By taking a poll to see if his or her constituents approve? Or by working with constituents and other elected officials to redress violations to the Constitution as the first priority of their office? By understanding the edicts of the constitution and its Amendments. By acting without bias. By asking, “What does the Constitution require of me?” By determining legal avenues to pursue, and above all, by listening to what his or her conscience articulates. A few examples to contemplate follow:
· The Constitution states, “The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.” Do lies that cause us to enter into wars constitute a high Crime? Does the approval of torture in violation of international law rise to the level of a high crime? Do wars that take property, without fair payment, the resources of another country amount to a high crime? When the President enters into undeclared wars what are you obligated to do? And do preemptive wars of aggression violate the constitution as well as international law?
· The First Amendment to the Constitution states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” Did the internment camps of World War II, or the camps at Guantanamoand elsewhere violate the protections of the First Amendment? Do attempts to introduce religious teachings into government contravene the First Amendment? Do attemps to limit access to Presidential appearance as in Colorado and elsewhere limit the rights of the people to assemble or to their exercise of free speech?
· The Sixth Amendment to the Constitution states, “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.” Does the holding United States citizens, against their will, without trial or due process a violation of their Sixth Amendment rights even if they are suspected of crimes against the state?
· The Eighth Amendment to the Constitution states, “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.” Is the torture at Guantanamoand other camps directly banned by the Eighth Amendment?
Comments