EDITION: U.S.
 
CONNECT    

Justice Roberts Flubs Obama Oath Of Office

MARK SHERMAN   01/20/09 09:10 PM ET   AP

Oath

WASHINGTON — Chief Justice John Roberts swore in Barack Obama as president Tuesday in the first of what could be many important interactions for the two men of differing politics who rose quickly to power. The encounter was briefly awkward after Obama stepped on Roberts' opening lines from the 35-word constitutionally prescribed oath of office. The chief justice then wandered into a verbal detour of his own.

By tradition, the presidential oath is administered by the chief justice, and in Roberts' case, it was his first inauguration since joining the Supreme Court in 2005.

Obama used the Bible on which Abraham Lincoln took the presidential oath in 1861. Roberts concluded the oath by adding, "So help you God?" And Obama, following a practice established by George Washington and followed by most presidents, replied: "So help me God."

Other than social encounters and official events, Obama and Roberts will likely see little of each other while overseeing their branches of government. Obama's legal team could be called upon to defend the president's most important policies in front of Roberts and his conservative-leaning court.

Former President George W. Bush left the court with two relatively young and reliably conservative voices, those of Roberts, 53, and Justice Samuel Alito, 58. Alito became a justice in 2006.

Roberts is the youngest chief justice in more than 200 years. He easily could still be in his role a quarter century from now, long after Obama has left office.

He and Obama are similar in many ways. Both are late baby boomers _ Obama is 47. And both got their law degrees from Harvard and made rapid ascents to power. But their politics diverge sharply.

Roberts was an official in Republican administrations before becoming an appeals court judge and then chief justice under Bush.

Obama was one of 22 Senate Democrats to vote against Roberts' confirmation to the Supreme Court in 2005 _ the first time a Supreme Court justice has sworn in a president who voted against him.

As president, Obama will try to use any Supreme Court vacancies to counter Roberts' influence, either by replacing aging liberals with justices as young as or younger than Roberts or by changing the court's balance if a conservative justice retires unexpectedly.

The last time a chief justice swore in a president of a different party was in 1997, when Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, a Republican, swore in Democrat Bill Clinton for a second term. Two years later, Rehnquist would preside over Clinton's impeachment trial in the Senate, which resulted in an acquittal.

On Tuesday, the stumble over the presidential oath was the only bump in an otherwise smooth ceremony.

Initially, Obama interrupted Roberts midway through the opening line, in which the president repeats his name and solemnly swears.

Next in the oath is the phrase "that I will faithfully execute the office of president of the United States." But Roberts rearranged the order of the words, not saying "faithfully" until after "president of the United States."

That appeared to throw Obama off. He stopped abruptly at the word "execute."

Recognizing something was off, Roberts then repeated the phrase, putting "faithfully" in the right place but without repeating "execute."

Obama then repeated Roberts' original, incorrect version: "... the office of president of the United States faithfully."

After that, they were back on track.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS

WASHINGTON — Chief Justice John Roberts swore in Barack Obama as president Tuesday in the first of what could be many important interactions for the two men of differing politics who rose quickl...
WASHINGTON — Chief Justice John Roberts swore in Barack Obama as president Tuesday in the first of what could be many important interactions for the two men of differing politics who rose quickl...
Filed by Rachel Weiner  | 
 
  • Comments
  • 739
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (20 total)
01:25 AM on 01/22/2009
If I'm ever elected president, remind me not to have someone lead me through the oath by asking me to repeat 3 sentences at a time.

Roberts should have known better. Roberts set an awkward pace for Obama to follow.

I believe that, subconscio­usly, Roberts was not feeling friendly toward Obama, and I believe that Roberts' attitude contribute­d to the mistakes.
09:08 PM on 01/21/2009
I think they were both a little nervous. It's the first lnaurgural for both men. When they do this again in 2013, they'll be old hands at it and it will go just fine.
06:48 PM on 01/21/2009
Roberts to Scalia before the Inaugurati­on: "I'll bet you I can make Obama talk like Bush."
05:34 PM on 01/21/2009
I find it astounding that so few Americans protest the overt politiciza­tion of the judiciary in general and the US Supreme Court in particular­. In my view, an essential quality that a person should have to qualify as a judge is lack of bias (other qualities include profound intelligen­ce and an extensive knowledge of the law). So, if a judicial candidate has shown bias by, for example, putting a conservati­ve or liberal spin on his or her interpreta­tion of the law, that should disqualify him or her from being a judge! But, the American system appears to function in reverse; bias is considered an essential quality by a president with the same biases, and, the more biased the candidate is, the more likely it is that he or she will be appointed a judge by the president. THAT'S WRONG, UNDERMINES THE RULE AND LAW AND IS A THREAT TO TO DEMOCRATIC PRINCIPLES­.
02:21 PM on 01/21/2009
On the very first act of a new administra­tion, a notable conservati­ve waltzes in unprepared and makes an notable blunder and conspicuou­s mistake. Why am I not surprised?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
booker52
avid reader
12:01 PM on 01/21/2009
What? Roberts thought he was so good he didn't need notes for a 35 word oath?? Screwed it up anyway now didn't he????
11:52 AM on 01/21/2009
Oh, big deal. The man is only human and it is not like he does this everyday. Obama had it all under control.
11:45 AM on 01/21/2009
Oh blather, however - the Supreme Court can really fardle dardle presidenti­al matters; example Y2K.  Now we have to clean up the mess, perhaps President Obama can even name some justices who have a copy of the constituti­on.
11:02 AM on 01/21/2009
Did anyone notice that Roberts said "TO the president of the United States" when he should have said "of"?
Roberts' intonation and lengthy pauses at the wrong moment were designed to make Obama mess it up. Obama handled it well: he looked him in the eye and waited, only to be given a total hash up of the correct words. A BIG DUH FOR ROBERTS!
10:54 AM on 01/21/2009
From this article (and other sources reporting on it) to many of the posts commenting on it...does not appear as if anyone cares to actually set aside "childish things".

C'mon folks, focus...2 wars, the economy, a nuclear Iran, Israeli and Palestinia­n conflict, Russian tensions, education, healthcare reform, unemployme­nt, global warming (just to remind us of a few matters that we might find a little more pressing than this). Get it together. If not now, when? What exactly will it take?
10:43 AM on 01/21/2009
I believe this is the "small minded, petty politics" that our great President spoke of.
10:29 AM on 01/21/2009
Even if it was a mistake on the part of John Roberts, it could have been avoided. Give me a break! Are you trying to tell me that the Chief Justice of the United States cannot memorize in a proper order, or better still, cannot read accurately the most sacred words that bestow power on the American Presidency­? Sigmund Freud argues that, at times, we fail to nip in the bud our deep-seate­d feelings of resentment after those thoughts assume their own dynamic energy.

Do you think Roberts was happy with Obama when he voted against his confirmati­on? In my view, that unfortunat­e incident is a derivative of repressed thoughts. Abnormal Psychology at Work.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Winthorpe
Need a fourth for squash
10:23 AM on 01/21/2009
"Faithfull­y," as an adverb, should come after the verb. Roberts had it right the first time, and that's the version that Obama stated.
01:16 PM on 01/21/2009
Yeah, because the justice should just ignore the constituti­on since he can obviously think of a better way to say it.

Right.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Winthorpe
Need a fourth for squash
06:52 PM on 01/21/2009
Yeah, like when we figured out a better way to treat non-white people. We've changed the Constituti­on a few times, in case you slept through that part in class.
10:12 AM on 01/21/2009
Hi
06:26 PM on 01/21/2009
High... Was Roberts?
10:07 AM on 01/21/2009
Okay ,I like Obama as much as the next but am I the ONLY person that noticed that Obama starting speaking before the Justice was finished with the first sentence and then read the next one back kind of in reverse? Come on people.I think he was a bit nervous, who wouldn't be?
11:57 AM on 01/21/2009
Yes, he started while Roberts was still going.

As for the second half, Roberts got the wording wrong and Obama waited for him to go back and get it right.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dennybop
My micro-bio is empty
10:34 PM on 01/21/2009
Not only did you and I and millions of others catch it....Mark Sherman who wrote the article caught it.. He wrote about it above!