Trump repudiates oath to “preserve, protect and defend” the Constitution
May 5, 2025
Trump refuses to acknowledge his obligation to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution.
In the most remarkable interview of a president of the United States ever, Donald Trump repeatedly evaded questions that asked him to affirm the obligations he assumed on January 20, 2025, when he took the presidential oath of office, as prescribed by the Constitution:
"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) 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."
See New York Times, Trump Says ‘I Don’t Know’ When Asked About Due Process and Upholding Constitution. (This article is accessible to all.)
See also, WSJ, Trump Says ‘I Don’t Know’ When Asked if He Must Uphold the Constitution. (Accessible to all.)
The interview was conducted by Kristen Welker during the Sunday morning broadcast of Meet the Press.
In the two most revealing exchanges, Trump claimed to be uncertain of his obligation to uphold the Constitution:
Welker: “Don’t you need to uphold the Constitution of the United States as president?”
Trump: “I don’t know. I have to respond by saying, again, I have brilliant lawyers that work for me, and they are going to obviously follow what the Supreme Court said.”
The second exchange, as described by the WSJ, unfolded as follows:
Trump was asked whether noncitizens are entitled to due process, which the Fifth Amendment requires before any person within the U.S. may “be deprived of life, liberty, or property.”
“I don’t know. I’m not, I’m not a lawyer. I don’t know,” . . . While the Fifth Amendment “might say that,” Trump said compliance would require “a million or two million or three million trials” before undesirable immigrants could be removed.
“I was elected to get them the hell out of here, and the courts are holding me from doing it,” Trump said.
To state the obvious, it was Donald Trump who took an oath to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution on January 20, 2025. It is no defense to violating that oath to say, “I have brilliant lawyers”—a risible lie on many levels.
Trump’s lawyers are not his lawyers; they owe their duty of loyalty to the Office of the President, not to Trump personally. More to the point, they are incompetent dissemblers who are seeking to evade the plain language of the Constitution to impose a white nationalist religious agenda on all Americans, whether they like it or not!
Trump's lawyers have resorted to bad faith tactics and a lack of candor in their efforts to evade the clear mandate of the Supreme Court’s ruling to “facilitate” the return of wrongly deported Kilmar Abrego Garcia. Despite the clear command of the Supreme Court, Trump has done nothing for 24 days to facilitate Garcia’s return. Indeed, Trump has not even asked El Salvador to release Garcia back to US custody.
Trump's open defiance of the Supreme Court’s order in the Abrego Garcia case is the “constitutional crisis” that many have feared. It is upon us—and explains why Trump dodged and weaved when asked if he must preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution.
Trump's defiance of the Supreme Court’s order in the Abrego Garcia case is only one of the violations of his presidential oath.
Trump has violated Article I by usurping Congress’s appropriation authority through impoundment of funds.
He has imposed illegal tariffs in violation of Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution.
He has invoked the Alien Enemies Act despite the absence of a war or invasion—a prerequisite to the invocation of the Act, thereby usurping Congress’s authority to declare war.
He has deported immigrants without the due process guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment.
The most egregious violation of the Constitution is Trump’s sale of cryptocurrency owned by Trump. Because Trump is the “issuer” of the cryptocurrency, the proceeds of every sale go directly to Trump.
A nearly perfect analogy would be if Joe Biden announced he had opened a checking account and that members of the public (including foreign nationals and corporations) were welcome to deposit funds into that account, in exchange for which they would receive a certificate of appreciation and a private tour of the White House.
The Biden hypothetical would immediately be condemned by Republicans, the media, and all Americans as open bribery and a violation of the Constitution’s Emoluments Clause.
Why, then, is there no such outrage arising from Trump's sale of a “currency” he issued, the proceeds of which go directly into his pocket?
The answer is that Trump is deliberately chipping away at the sense of outrage over his daily violations of the Constitution. “Hemming and hawing” his way through the interview with Kristen Welker was merely another effort to raise doubt as to whether the president must always protect and defend the Constitution. Trump seems hell-bent on creating the “Trump exception to the Constitution” at every opportunity.
What should we do about it? We cannot allow violations of the Constitution to become background noise or dismissed as mere political disagreements. The ongoing, intentional violations of the Constitution and binding court orders should provoke outrage, mass demonstrations, and impeachment, conviction, and removal from office.
While impeachment must await flipping the House in 2026, political cynics are already dismissing impeachment as pointless, saying, “Been there, done that.” It is our duty to defend the Constitution when a president (or any of his senior officers) deliberately violates its provisions. Failing to do so reduces the Constitution to a historical document that describes the past but not the future of America.
Trump's evasive answers on Sunday matter because they are an admission that he is failing to “preserve, protect, and defend” the Constitution on a daily basis. Indeed, he is violating its provisions in the most fundamental way possible. We lose sight of that fact at our peril.
CBS News 60 Minutes focuses on Trump's assault on the legal profession
On Sunday evening, CBS News 60 Minutes broadcast a great segment on Trump's attack on the legal profession. The full segment can be viewed here, and I highly recommend that you take the time to watch the entire segment: CBS News 60 Minutes, Trump presidential orders target law firms. Here's how some lawyers say that threatens the rule of law.
Scott Pelley interviewed a handful of courageous lawyers who were willing to go on camera to talk about Trump's assault on the independence of the legal profession. Interviewees included Marc Elias, John Keker, Brenna Frey, and Donald Ayer.
The entire segment is compelling, but the following two segments capture the crisis in full (quotes taken from CBS 60 Minutes transcript).
Marc Elias: Donald Trump hates me because I fight hard, and I fight for free and fair elections. I insist on fighting for democracy in court, fighting for voting rights in court, and insist on telling the truth about what the outcome of the 2020 election was.
Scott Pelley: Are there risks in doing the work that you're doing?
Marc Elias: I'd be an idiot not to be worried. The question though is what do you do? Right, do you just cower in the corner? Do you just try to disappear? Do you just leave democracy to-- fend for itself? Or do you stand tall and do the best you can every day to-- represent your clients and try to preserve the rule of law?
A second segment included prominent trial lawyer John Keker:
Scott Pelley: You're not suggesting that the president's running a protection racket.
John Keker: I am, I'm suggesting that he is violating the rule that says, "you can't offer a thing of value in return for an official act." That happens to be the definition of bribery. Anybody else who came to Washington and said, "I will give you $100 million of free legal services if you do this for me," would be convicted of a bribe.
There is more, but you get the picture. Again, the entire segment is worth your time and attention.
Congratulations to CBS 60 Minutes for continuing to cover controversial topics at a time when Trump is pressuring CBS’s parent (Paramount) as it seeks Trump's approval of a merger with Skydance.
Concluding Thoughts
There is more to cover, but Jill and I are preparing for our temporary relocation to D.C. to await the birth of our fifth grandchild in the next week or so. As usual, we have put off packing until the last minute. I need to wrap up the newsletter so I can pack up my recording equipment for the audio version of the newsletter.
Jill and I attended a meeting on Saturday morning that precluded our usual participation in a protest on Saturday. After our meeting ended, we drove to a local mall to make a last-minute purchase of an item for our upcoming trip. As we approached the mall, we saw about 100 protestors at a major intersection, waving signs, making noise, and walking in large groups in the crosswalks (obeying all traffic regulations, of course).
It was an impressive sight—and not merely because of the number of people and their enthusiasm. We have protested at the same intersection and know that people have been showing up at that corner week after week. Their numbers are growing, as is their enthusiasm. That is not only appropriate, but also necessary. On Sunday, Trump told us that he is unsure whether he is bound by the constitutional oath that is the sum total of his job description.
Trump is trying to wear us down so that he can overturn the Constitution with a minimum of resistance. We cannot let that happen. And we aren’t. That is why I was filled with pride and a renewed sense of hope when I saw the protesters on Saturday.
We are on the right path, but we need to do more, in larger numbers, more frequently, and with greater volume.
We are making a difference. Keep up the good work!
Daily Dose of Perspective
The irises are blooming in our front and back yards. The Iris Nebula is 1,300 light years from Earth. When the light in the image below began its journey to Earth, the first written version of the Anglo-Saxon epic, Beowulf, was created.
So proud of "60 MInutes" for airing the segment on Trump attacking the lawyers. Under the circumstances, it would have been easy to pull it. I hope that their telling the ugly truth about this administration finds a way to continue.
As for the "Meet the Press" interview, I couldn't help but think of the many times we've heard Trump say that he knew more than the generals, the scientists, etc., and yet now he acts like he knows nothing about the one thing that is his job as President, to uphold the Constitution. I think it is up to reporters to continue to ask, "Will you uphold the Constitution?" Ask it over and over again.
A frequent suggestion, here and elsewhere, has been to focus on local elections in red areas, and I have done so in our Richardson, TX mayor’s race. Saturday, we elected, pretty doggone impressively, our first Muslim mayor! More important than his religion, though, is the inclusive, transparent approach he will bring to governance. Texas as a whole actually had a great night, repudiating school board extremists as well. (Article below) Gosh, it feels good to win some!
https://open.substack.com/pub/lonestarleft/p/magas-very-bad-night-in-texas?r=8vyqy&utm_medium=ios