[MV=PY]

I believe all of them would be obliged to repeal an unconstitutional law, e.g.:

"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."

Isn't citing their obligation to repeal sufficient? It's part of the constitution.

[justiceseeker93]

What you are quoting is the presidential oath, which is in the Constitution itself. But the oath taken by House members, though somewhat similar in terms of supporting the Constitution, is not in the Constitution.

Nowhere in the Constitution is there any specific authority given for Congress to repeal, although it's been done quite a number of times throughout American history, presumably on the assumption that the legislation being repealed concerned matters within the scope of Congess' constitutional power, and therefore the repeal was also within that scope of power.

But (de facto) repeals of earlier legislation deemed to be unconstitutional have traditionally been done through court decisions, not through Congress. So there could be a problem citing a particular clause in the Constitution as the basis for repealing, say, ObamaCare, because ObamaCare itself cannot be supported on any Constitutional basis. There's the dilemma.