To serve the President of the United States, at his pleasure. At least that's what his commissioning warrant states. Subordinate officer (and enlisted) don't get to question the authority of command. Although a subordinate can challenge the legality of an order, they can't challenge the authority of a superior to issue that order (except in extremely limited circumstances), so long as that superior officer is in the appropriate chain of command. It's a subtle difference, but not at all an insignificant one.
This isn't even a close call. Barack Obama is the President. Military officers don't get to question if his election was valid or if he's fit for command. This Army officer will lose and his attorney has exposed him to prosecution under several Articles of the UCMJ.
"Support and defend the constitution of the united states and to obey the orders of the president and the officers appointed over me.... "
Guy's a dumb ass. Soon to be a court martialed dumb ass
“This isn’t even a close call. Barack Obama is the President. Military officers don’t get to question if his election was valid or if he’s fit for command. This Army officer will lose and his attorney has exposed him to prosecution under several Articles of the UCMJ.”
I respectfully disagree with you. An officer CAN question the lawfulness of an order. The source of that order is one thing that determines its lawfulness. IF President Obama is not constitutionally qualified to be POTUS, THEN any orders issued by him or flowing out of his decisions then become unlawful because the source was not lawful.
An Army Officer takes the following oath:
“I (insert name), having been appointed a (insert rank) in the U.S. Army under the conditions indicated in this document, do accept such appointment and 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.”
Notice that an Army Officer’s allegiance is to the Constitution. IF he/she has sincere concerns about matters (orders) pertaining to the Constitution....then the Constitution is his/her guide. An Officer is COMMISSIONED by act of Congress. Now notice the following enlisted oath of office:
“I, (NAME), 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; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.”
Notice the significant differences in the oaths. Enlisted specifically say, “I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me.....” You don’t find that wording in a COMMISSIONED Officer’s Oath.
Don’t pilor this Major. His intentions are good....to Support and Defend the Constitution. That is what is driving this whole thing.
IF President Obama was to simply stop stalling and produce proof of Natural Born status.....then the Major would have no grounds to question a POTUS directive.
President Obama needs to produce the proof and stop all the speculation. IF he is NOT qualified...he needs to step down. IF he IS qualified, the rest of us need to shut up about this issue. IMO, the ball is in the President’s court.
BTW - OldDeckHand - I was a “Sea Lawyer” a long time ago.:-)