Grover Norquist pledge is anti-constitutional

[KonaKane]

Grover Norquist has become one of the most powerful individuals in the nation, because as head of the political action group "Americans For Tax Reform", he has frightened a large number of Congresspeople into taking a "pledge" against ever raising taxes.

However, the Norquist slaves in Congress have pledged themselves into a problem. Once elected to office, our law requires them to take ONE singular oath of office, which in effect renders previous oaths having to do with their duties, nonbinding.

Article VI of the US Constitution states that all elected members of Congress take AN (one) oath to support the constitution. The text of the Constitutional Oath is not written in the Constitution, but the current oath was enacted by Congress in 1862:

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.

Pledging oneself to an opinion or extra-constitutional idea, when it may interfere with the dutiful execution of office, is an in flagrante abrogation of the Oath of Office. Those in Congress who have taken such pre-election oaths need to publically renounce them, or be held in contempt of their office and removed.

So which court will be the first to hear a case like this?

[tabarnhart]

i can't stand Norquist, but Article VI does not include the word "an".

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.

Americans are free to take any number of oaths/affirmations that do not violate others. Norquist is a threat to the country's domestic tranquility & prosperity, but not because Congresscritters sign his "oath". it's not an oath to overthrow the country, so it's legal.

[KonaKane]

Operative term "that do not violate others". Taking a pledge never to raise taxes, when it may actually become necessary in the rigor of Congressional action to raise a tax at some time, is an obvious impediment to the actual oath of office.

John Ashcroft got into trouble for a similar thing when he publicly proclaimed "Christ is my King" when it is part of his office to renounce being a subject to a King, any monarchy or government system outside our own.

[Brainwreck]

Right on! It would be great to see some court action taken on this issue particularly since it is a vote to overthrow this country as we know it. And may I only hope that they run over traitor Norquist on their way to the door.