Steve, you ARE an expert. Your hunch is precisely the correct legal analysis. Obama became President at noon Washington time by law. The oath is ceremonial.

Yet another wingnut zombie lie is born.

I'm speculating if Chris Wallace is actually a journalist.

what kind of strict constructionist could fuck up a simple job like that? or was that the original intent?

Yeah. I was in a loud bar (at 11:00 am in IL), just to watch the inauguration, and I wasn't sure I was seeing it correctly, but it did seem Roberts fubar-ed it, stepping all over Obama's lines. Thanks for clarifying it for me.

But how sharp can the guy be, if he can't even get a 35-word thing right?

I advocate that someone who can flub that isn't fit to be the Chief Justice and should maybe step down.

AND REPLACE HIM WITH A PROGRESSIVE! LOL

And it doesn't matter if the word "faithfully" is in the middle or the end --- Obama said the right words. If they want to fire anyone, it should be Roberts.

He also finished it off with a question: "So help you God?"

What a nutball, the oath isn't a cross examination.

And the right wing nut jobs will start screaming in three, two, one . . .

I would only be shocked if the conspiracy theorists didn't pounce on this. After all a sizable part of the conservative commentariat have declared that George W Bush was a success because we haven't had a terrorist attack on US soil since 9/11. Obiously logic and sensibility is far beyond the reach of these folks. Fortunately, they are in the minority.

There were so many screw-ups initiated by Roberts that I forgot to listen for the Hussein. But at least that was done as Obama wished.

"Steve, you ARE an expert. Your hunch is precisely the correct legal analysis. Obama became President at noon Washington time by law. The oath is ceremonial."

Can ou please cite for me that law? Because Article 2 Section 1 of the Constitution says "Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation"

"Shall" means "shall". It isn't a suggestion.

I hope dextronuts try to make hash of the Oath flub, since so many people all around the World will hate and despise them for it. And even more since Roberts fucked it up first and this will underscore how wingnuts like to pass blame to others. Note that the direct words in the Constitution don't include space for the PE's name, so all this time it has been done wrong anyway? And those clowns don't care about the USC anyway, this is just a pathetic way for them to enjoy dirtying the man rising up after their fall from grace.

I'm repeating another comment since it is so damn cogent:

I think Justice Roberts fucking up the oath is a perfect symbol of the transfer of power. Roberts deciding to "wing-it W-style" didn't use notes and ended up fucking up a very historic event. Obama, in contrast, was left trying to fix the half cocked mess. What a wonderful symbol for what Bush is handing off and the different approaches of the two administrations.
Posted by: palinoscopy on January 20, 2009 at 1:29 PM

I note right-leaning sites are already angling to blame Obama instead (no surprise), Breitbart (a Drudge affiliate/ish) has under "upcoming headlines":
Obama Screws Up Oath
,also about the "44 v. 43" issue ... Wow, what a big deal! BTW Obama did refer to a "Capital" being deserted in 1777, no DC yet but apologists note that can well mean Philadelphia.

>"John Roberts had one job to do today and he sort of screwed up."

Appointed by Bush... would you have any other expectations?

Hmmm... a thought comes to mind that in the entire Bush regime, there were NO shining stars... i.e. people who displayed outstanding ability, courage etc. I think it takes tremendous effort achieve that sort of result.

If it's cause to get Obama to say the oath again before signing any paperwork, it's certainly cause to impeach roberts.

You are the expert. He became President, not by law, but by the Constitution:

Amendment XX

Section 1. The terms of the President and Vice President shall end at noon on the 20th day of January, and the terms of Senators and Representatives at noon on the 3d day of January, of the years in which such terms would have ended if this article had not been ratified; and the terms of their successors shall then begin.

BTW: Because Article 2 Section 1 syas "Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation", does that mean Hillary couldn't have begun the "Execution" of the "Office" without a Constitutional re-write? :-)

Who's to say that Roberts didn't "screw up" the oath on purpose, the better to embarrass and/or discredit the new POTUS?

Paranoid, I know, but by this point there is very little that I would put past these pricks.

It seems to me that srewing up a soup sandwich is a common trait if one is under stress.

And what court is going to rule that Obama isn't president? The Supreme Court? Headed by the justice who failed to properly administer the oath in the first place? As Steve says, the mind reels.

Ya gotta wonder about these guys' blood pressure...

First of all, I want it on the record that I think it is a silly debate, that being said...

The other pertinent part is Amendment 20 section 3, which says the president shall assume the office at noon on Jan 20th if he qualifies. That "qualifies" could be open to debate, if the correct oath is necessary to qualify then Obama is still just the president elect. The ammendment goes on to state that if the pres-elect does not qualify, the vice president elect shall act as president until such time as the pres-elect does qualify.

Theoretically Biden could be the Acting President until Obama gets the oath correct, but the whole thing is silly...

...until some nutcase takes some exec order or law Obama signs to court over the issue.

Four years from today, Chief Justice John Roberts should be BENCHED, in favor of anyone else President Obama desires. There is no rule that the Chief Justice or any of the Nine administer the Oath of Office.

Steve: "I'm not an expert, but my understanding is that a noon today, by law, Barack Obama became president. The oath was a formality."

Your understanding is in fact the correct one, but not necessarily for the reason you perceive.

Per Article V, Section 2 of the Constitution of the United States:

"Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation: '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.'"

However, Article V has since been amended with the subsequent adoption upon ratification on January 23, 1933 of Amendment XX, of which Section 2 states clearly and unambiguously:

"The terms of the President and the Vice President shall end at noon on the 20th day of January, and the terms of Senators and Representatives at noon on the 3d day of January, of the years in which such terms would have ended if this article had not been ratified; and the terms of their successors shall then begin."

(Emphasis is mine.)

And what court is going to rule that Obama isn't president? The Supreme Court? Headed by the justice who failed to properly administer the oath in the first place?

Please, like Roberts and his toadies couldn't get a 5-4 ruling in their own favor? He probably wouldn't even feel the need to recuse himself.

It's fodder for the wingnuts. I guarantee you some idiots are filing suit right now claiming that Obama isn't the real president because he didn't say the oath correctly.

Yahoo's article has it right, that Roberts goofed.

Also, Obama signed a book after the ceremony - probably signed under the oath, just as the new US Senators did after they took their oaths.

Okay, here is what Fox Noise is reporting about the oath snafu:

"But at one point early on, Obama paused, as if grasping for the next words. Roberts helped him over the brief awkward moment, repeating a few words to get Obama back on track."

Were they watching the same thing? Maybe they will become so irrelevant that no one will listen to them any more.

Roberts was probably drowning his sorrows last night and imbibed too deeply; it's amazing what a hangover can do to your memory.

But, at least, he apologised, in public. Or so my husband reported. Roberts saying "My fault, my fault" was televised for everyone to see, so Drudge and others can go and...

Hey, I started this conspiracy a couple of hours ago a few threads back. I want credit;>

Never underestimate the nuttiness of the nutjobs. Or as Tom Lehrer said: The out patients are out in force!

I have to say that if you look back at prior oaths of office, you will find that the chief justice usually follows the president elect's name with "do solemnly swear" and then the PE parrots the line. Roberts was correct in NOT pausing after saying Barack Hussein Obama. BHO screwed up in starting to say his name PRIOR to the Chief Justice saying the line. This threw the Chief Justice off.

John Roberts might have screwed up the oath, and I might not agree with his approach to constitutional interpretation, but he's a very smart man and it just shows that we are all human. They used to tell us in law school that there were two groups that were at risk of failing the Bar Exam but for very different reasons, the A students because the didn't think they needed to study, and the C students because they weren't that bright. Think of the Oath as the bar exam. So simple, but so unforgiving, and John Roberts as one embarrassed First Year associate.

Still it was very disappointing. Maybe I care about the precision of these things more than most, but I was disappointed that the whole process ran late, from the beginning the Obamas were fifteen minutes late arriving at St. John's. As a father of three, I could only imagine what child meltdown had started the ball rolling. Obama hates to be late, and I think it was a distraction to him. I was still trying to recover from the oath screwup when he started his speech, and I have to admit being distracted. All in all, maybe small potato(e)s but not a great start on the pomp and circumstance front.

Roberts had one 35-second job to do and he screwed it up. Unbelievable.

Dumb mistake for self-styled strict constructionist.

BHO has not been properly sworn in. We are in a constitutional crisis.

BHO became President at 12:00 noon regardless of the Oath. However, Roberts did NOT administer to BHO the oath precisely and exactly PRESCRIBED UNDER THIS CONSTITUTION!

I say Roberts did it purposefully.

Roberts had one 35-second job to do and he screwed it up.

Roberts believes he has a job to do, all right, but I'd say he never considered administering the oath of office to a Democrat as part of it.

Thanks again to our Democratic Senators for helping put this jerk on the Court.

Good grief. Roberts screwed up, yes, and palinoscopy's take is amusing.

However, people saying that Roberts did it on purpose or that he should suffer consequences (or at least, consequences more serious than embarrassment) are as goofy as people who are saying that Obama screwed it up or that he's not really president.

The bobble on the oath reminded me of how Lady Diana Spencer mixed up the name of Charles Philip Arthur George as she was saying her marriage him to be her lawfully wedded husband.... yet no one accused her of not being married to the Prince of Wales or worse yet, having committed bigamy/adultery with her father-in-law by promising to marry Philip Charles Arthur George instead...

PS We all know how that sad story ended....

If the oath has to be letter perfect, it can certainly get a redo later today with video, several hundred witnesses, signed testimonies of same, and a commemorative photograph, all of which would still lack credibility for the "experts" at Fox News, bless their divisive hides.

NOW can we get back to the important things, like turning the country Muslim and opening our doors to terrorists, and all of those other insightful conservative predictions of an Obama Administration? (Snark)

OT: Did anyone but me think Dick did not look good today? Sitting in his wheelchair, he looked just plain old.

Why hasn't obama fixed all the problems of the world yet? When will they be fixed?? We are all waiting. Own the problem, libs. No more whining.

Roberts should resign.

Great job, Brownie, and you too, Johnny!

To tomj: There's a good reason Roberts had to phrase it as a question, actually: "so help me God" isn't part of the oath. It's tacked on by people who think that mentioning the name of their magical sky daddy helps enforce people's promises, and sane politicians who can't avoid responding to them.

You know, like the reason I'm only citizen second class in Texas -- because I can't hold elected office there under the state Constitution, being an atheist and all.

Actually, the oath is NOT ceremonial. The Oath Ceremony is ceremonial. At precisely noon ET, UNDER the stage, Barack Obama, with witnesses, signed the oath and became the 44th President. Him taking the oral oath was a mere formality, and by that time he was already POTUS.

The other thing you're wrong about is what John Roberts was "supposed to" say. He probably shouldn't have paused, but the fact is there is no constitutional directive as to when the CJ is supposed to allow the Pres-elect to repeat. That said, check youtube for previous Presidential oaths. Renquist has always ended the first sentence after "do solemnly swear". Roberts was probably doing the same thing. Obama should have waited, but Roberts shouldn't have paused.

"So help me God" is part of the oath. Check the constitution. Are you just making this up, William? If you're an atheist, fine, but you should be confident enough in your beliefs such that you don't feel the need to make stuff up.

Don't mean to distract from this important issue but anyone notice that the market is in free fall today?

John Roberts might have screwed up the oath, and I might not agree with his approach to constitutional interpretation, but he's a very smart man and it just shows that we are all human.

If I were confident that this wasn't going to bring a flurry of lawsuits and blog posts breathlessly insisting that Obama isn't the real president because the oath got screwed up, it would just be a goofy mistake in a stress-filled day. If nothing else, Roberts could well have just gotten stage fright standing in front of a million people in-person and countless millions more watching at home and his mind went blank. Happens all the time.

I'm mostly annoyed that now I'm going to be forced to listen to conspiracy theorists breathlessly explain why Roberts' (probably) innocent mistake means that OBAMA IS AN ILLEGAL PRESIDENT!!11!1!!ONE!!

Roberts should resign.

"So help me God" is part of the oath. Check the constitution.

Checked it, and no, it is not part of the oath:

Article II, Section 1.

....Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation: "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."

http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#Article2

Note also the ability to "affirm", rather than swear, which is put there specifically for those who do not want to swear an oath.

Are you just making this up, nimble? If you're a god-botherer, fine, but you should be confident enough in your beliefs such that you don't feel the need to make stuff up.

See Robert at 3:43 and 3:59 pm illustrating my point.

I'm afraid I'm going to have to disagree with those who are saying that Obama became president at noon, regardless of the oath.

I guess it depends on what "being president" means, and we are certainly splitting hairs, but...

Yes, the 20th Amendment says that "the terms of their successors shall then begin" at noon. But that simply means (to me, anyway) that noon is when the four year period begins, the first minute at which Obama becomes (in the terms of Section 3 of the 20th Amendment) "qualified" to become president.

But Article 2 Section 1 is quite clear, and is in no way contradicted or superceded by the 20th Amendment: to "exectute the Office", to "be" the president, he "shall" take the oath.

Was he "president" at noon"? Maybe, maybe not. Did he "have" the powers of the office? Not until 12:07, when he took the oath.

Yet another wingnut zombie lie is born.

As far as I'm concerned, this is a good thing. The more idiotic, black helicopter, nonsensical paranoid musings they engage in, the better, because it will detract from efforts that might actually hurt (like opposing progressive legislation, or engaging in grassroots politicking).

I don't think Roberts screwed it up on purpose.

On the other hand, I don't think it's entirely farfetched to believe that his disfluency here reflected a certain amount of ambivalence about Obama.

If there is any justice there will be a new Chief Justice of the US within the next four years and hopefully a handful of new associate justices.

The issue about "so help me God" is a cogent and ironic one, and deserves to be thrown at wingnutjobs. The original Oath in the Constitutiion does not have that phrase as noted earlier, and since added language violates a quote just like a rearrangement, omission, etc., then all POTUSes who used that added phrase were not really President!

Make that point on every discussion group where you see assholes griping about Obama not getting the Oath just right, in addition to reminding them that Roberts screwed up first (forget the pause bit, it was his messing up the words after that.)

Was he "president" at noon"? Maybe, maybe not. Did he "have" the powers of the office? Not until 12:07, when he took the oath.

Except that the recitation of the oath in front of the crowd is not the actual oath-taking. The actual oath-taking was done when Obama signed it behind the scenes at 12 noon. The recitation in front of the crowd is just for show.

This is like arguing that since the priest mispronounced my friend's name at her wedding, she's not legally married even though she has the signed and certified marriage certificate.

"I'm speculating if Chris Wallace is actually a journalist."

No, but he plays one on TV.

Was he "president" at noon"? Maybe, maybe not. Did he "have" the powers of the office? Not until 12:07, when he took the oath.

He was President and empowered to exercise the powers of the office at the later of noon and the moment he signed the oath, as Presidents do before the ceremonial swearing in which serves as a public display of commitment to the oath already taken.

As, you know, others have pointed out upthread, even before your comment.

I heard that Roberts did not refer to a written text and ordinarily, the Justices use one. Not hard to see how in the intensity of the moment, your memory might not serve you well.

I can also believe that while he did not intend to screw up, that he didnt care enough to pace himself and therefore the new President.

I remember being surprised at how quickly he jumped into it, almost not letting Obama get set and then wait a couple of seconds before starting. It was almost like he just wanted to get it over with.

Mnemosyne and cmdicely -

You and I are in agreement.

What I was (and still am) objecting to is what Steve B said in the original post, that "at noon today, by law, Barack Obama became president... The oath was a formality."

I have been saying that the oath is NOT a formality, that it MUST be taken. Whether it is "taken" orally in public, or privately in writing, is immaterial to that point. My point is that to "execute the office", the oath must be taken.

Let's all be thankful for our faithful trolls: Al and Marler as well as John Hansen (and manyother's whom I don't recall immediately) who honestly believe they are having an intellectual discussion, just because they are commenting on Steve Benen's wonderful blog.

They thing it will rub off so they can take it back to their right wing sites and emulate what's going on in smart people's brains.

Let's us keep the welcome mat out in the future as well, as these trolls are the reminders we need on a daily basis that there still are ignorant, biased people out there suffering from severe cognitive dissonance.

We can't let our guard down and think that all of a sudden, with OBAMA at the helm everthing will be taken care of. Republican will be Republicans, and it is in their nature to ONLY see the negative and to find ways to blame all the wrongs on liberals and progressives.

None of those trolls have ever repented for voting Bush into office twice; they do not deserve forgiveness (yet) They need at least 16 years in the wilderness and enjoy Dante's inferno.

We can only hope that maybe, just maybe, they will actually start realizing that it isn't all that bad. We just have to keep reminding then that all the things that are good in this country, and taken for granted by Republican voters; started out as liberal ideas fought every inch by Republicans. Their revisionist histories - courtesy of O'Reilly, Limbaugh, Coulter, Malkin, Kristol, Hannity, Scarborough, and their ilk, has Republicans believe they are the ones who save this country. Nothing could be further from the truth, but what else are they going to do?

The whole controversy is easily solved. Yes, Barack Obama is the President, but he may not "execute" the office before he takes the oath, kinda like a President who is temporarily disabled. That makes Biden Acting President. Except, the situation is very easily remedied by having Obama take the oath again administered by, say, a Justice of Peace, or even the Chief Justice again.

... and he wants to be our Chief Justice...

I SO hope the fReichtards and Birth Certificate fetishists spend a lot of time and money on this. Really, how can we encourage them?

The whole controversy is easily solved. Yes, Barack Obama is the President, but he may not "execute" the office before he takes the oath, kinda like a President who is temporarily disabled. That makes Biden Acting President. Except, the situation is very easily remedied by having Obama take the oath again administered by, say, a Justice of Peace, or even the Chief Justice again.

And again, because apparently this needs to be repeated time and time again until it sinks in:

He was President and empowered to exercise the powers of the office at the later of noon and the moment he signed the oath, as Presidents do before the ceremonial swearing in which serves as a public display of commitment to the oath already taken. As, you know, others have pointed out upthread, even before your comment.

Wait until near the end of Obama's second term, and then agree with all the rightwingers that he was never really president the first time around because of the oath, so he's eligible for a third term. (/snark)

Despite the Caesarian (or Augustan) pomp, we are not the ancient Romans, who if they failed to carry out a religious rite to the letter, invalidated it and had to start over again. Cease with the floccinaucinihilipilification.

I have been saying that the oath is NOT a formality, that it MUST be taken. Whether it is "taken" orally in public, or privately in writing, is immaterial to that point. My point is that to "execute the office", the oath must be taken.

True, but the point that cm and I have been trying to get across is that the oath that people are complaining about being flubbed is not actually the legal oath, just the show oath for the crowd.

Even if the public oath were the legal oath, the argument that it invalidates his presidency would still be stupid. If you're in court and flub the oath-taking before your testimony, can the opposing attorney have your words stricken from the record because you said, "the entire truth" instead of "the whole truth"?

I think this issue is not entirely free from doubt. While the 20th Amendment makes it clear that Obama's term has begun, Article II, sec. 1 neverthless says he cannot "enter on the Execution of his Office" until he says the quoted oath.

I'm not sure what "enter on the Execution of his Office" means, but I don't think it's frivolous to say that while his term may have begun, and that while he's the President under the 20th Amendment, he cannot yet perform Article II functions.

He's a constitutional scholar. He has a smart white house counsel. If it hasn't been done already, he should take the oath of office immediately again before any article III judge he can find, in private, and dispense with this silly issue.

Roberts did indeed flub it, but based on the videos I found of 2 Bushes and Clinton's oath of office, the first response is not at the name, it's after the word "swear". So it does look like Obama rushed the first response. Coincidentally, so did GHW Bush.

Note USC says:

Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation:

"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."

It says "take" the Oath, which can be in written form instead of spoken. Many have noted lately, that PE signs an Oath first and then goes through the public ceremony.

sara: "Cease with the floccinaucinihilipilification."

Excuse me, but I don't floccinaucinihilipilificate.

Nor have I ever floccinaucinihilipilificated.

He needs to sacrifice a goat and examine its entrails for propitious signs. Not done until then.

Chief Justice John Roberts should immediately resign and let President Barack Obama appoint his replacement.

From the PowderHound at 2:58 PM:

Okay, here is what Fox Noise is reporting about the oath snafu:

The Hound then cites an AP report. Impressive effort.

Why are all the Bush appointees such screw-ups?

Thirty five words and he muffs it.

I hope he's better at his full time gig.

I have been saying that the oath is NOT a formality, that it MUST be taken. Whether it is "taken" orally in public, or privately in writing, is immaterial to that point. My point is that to "execute the office", the oath must be taken.

He took it in writing and signed it, so he's president and you can rest easily--and concentrate on getting a life.

Yes, this is much ado about nothing. How about that Justice Roberts...this is the only time that most of the billions watching will ever see you, and you flub your lines. Should we get a _professional_ next time, like Tom Hanks or John Cusack? They were right there... ;)