How do we resolve the conundrum that in our oath, we support and defend the Constitution, yet obey the orders of the president?

2021-01-12T17:53:06-05:00

Do we rely on the "lawful order" argument?

Response by MAJ Bryan Zeski made Jan 12 at 2021 6:09 PM

2021-01-12T18:09:23-05:00

For the Commissioned Officer side, the Oath is only to the Constitution - not to obey the President.
We rely on the "obey the orders of the Officers appointed over me" to keep that all in line with the Constitution.

Response by SFC Michael Hasbun made Jan 12 at 2021 6:31 PM

2021-01-12T18:31:50-05:00

There's no conundrum. This isn't North Korea.

Response by PO3 Phyllis Maynard made Jan 12 at 2021 8:39 PM

2021-01-12T20:39:38-05:00

MSgt Jeff Brown to the responses that are certainly correct, those too military officials the POTUS Trump fired obviously were in line with the Constitution but who enforces the correct decisions and protect those generals upholding the Constitution from presidential reprisals.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 12 at 2021 9:36 PM

2021-01-12T21:36:50-05:00

But the Officer Oath is to the Constitution, and doesn't mention the President. So in the rare exception of a Direct Order by the President to Enlisted personnel all orders are filtered through the President to Officers who swore loyalty to the Constitution directly.

Response by LTJG Roy Shine made Jan 13 at 2021 1:41 PM

2021-01-13T13:41:04-05:00

Defend the Constitution first.

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Jan 14 at 2021 9:38 PM

2021-01-14T21:38:17-05:00

The constitution is the most important institution. It gives authority, rules and responsibilities for the 3 branches of the government. It illuminates checks and balances. It also specifies how democracy is maintained through elections and the will of the people. The constitution takes precedence.