To The Reader’s Forum:

What else is there to say?

Donald J. Trump said the “Presidential Oath” at his inauguration, that he repeated slowly, pausing several times, to Chief Justice John Roberts, the words, “I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

So, Trump went on “Meet the Press” with Kristen Welker and was asked if he needs to uphold the Constitution. Trump said, “I don’t know.” Now, Trump was not asked if he needed to “defend” the Constitution, rather if he should “uphold” it, which I would say is a much lesser standard. Article 14, Section 1 says in relevant part that it is unlawful, “…deprive any person of life, liberty or property, without due process of law.” Notice that the language says “person” plain and simple.

Thus, we have a “president” who has declared an oath to “defend” the Constitution who says “I don’t know” regarding the very same Constitution language that he swore to “defend” in his first term. Clearly, Trump defied the Presidential oath. While Trump may not like the language, he has not tried to change the language, thus the language has meant the same about “due process” for well over 200 years!

No lawyer in his right mind would tell a judge in a court of law that “any person” is not entitled to “due process”! Reference to his “lawyers” is the same as if Trump was in court since he is telling them what to say to a judge. “I don’t know” is Trump’s way of avoiding his oath to “protect and defend the Constitution of the United States”.

The mere fact that it is taking a judge so long to decide the merits of the case is evidence that the DOJ is, itself, getting “due process” – as silly as the DOJ’s arguments are! Frankly, I think the case should have been decided based on the words of the Presidential Oath! In other words, why a judge is taking “so long” to decide this case when the judge’s order and the Supreme Court ruling in another nearly identical case have effectively decided in the migrants’ (“any person”) favor is beyond me!

Paul L. Demler

Jamestown