This answer really doesn’t wash with me sorry. She swore an oath to do her duty and backed out. Excuses are excuses, even the good ones. We do not need excuses from the chief executive of the country.
Which of her duties did she neglect, and how did it hurt Alaska?
Not that I expect an honest answer from a weasel.
You fail to take into account that the State of Alaska benefitted from her "backing out" of her oath. That it was in the best interest of the people of Alaska for her to "back out" of her oath. That the State of Alaska thrived under further conservative leadership, unencumbered by phoney, expensive, distracting and time-consuming "ethics" lawsuits by her "backing out" of her oath.
Foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds. Think about it.
She swore an oath to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of Alaska, and that I will faithfully discharge my duties as Governor to the best of my ability." I'm not sure how resigning to spare the state expenses and delayed business due to frivolous ethics complaints violates that oath.
If anything, her resignation under those conditions showed s greater fidelity to the principles behind the oath than staying and "fighting" to protect her own political position and future would have shown.