Every member of Congress takes the same oath. They raise their right hand and pledge to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic. Those aren’t just pretty words on parchment. For generations of Americans – veterans, police officers, civil servants – that oath is a covenant. You mean it, or you don’t take it.
Yet here we are. Self-described democratic socialists are winning primaries across the country, and a uncomfortable question is barreling toward the next Congress – one most people in Washington would rather not answer.
From Fox News:
A little-known congressional maneuver could block members of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) from being sworn in as members of the House of Representatives next year, even if they win their elections on Tuesday.
Members-elect must swear an oath to uphold the Constitution before they can become full members of the House. At the beginning of a new Congress, that oath is typically taken en masse by all 435 members, led by the House speaker.
Now, let’s talk about what the DSA actually believes. Their published platform doesn’t call for tweaking the Constitution. It doesn’t propose a few amendments. It demands scrapping the entire document and drafting a new one from scratch. These are the people lining up to swear they’ll defend it.
The oath means something
Rep. Keith Self of Texas didn’t mince words: “You cannot swear an oath to support and defend the Constitution while actively working to destroy it. The oath of office is not just words you say at a ceremony. It is a belief.”
He’s right. And the mechanism he’s referencing is straightforward. Any member-elect can challenge another’s right to be sworn in by presenting evidence that the individual has no intention of honoring the oath. The full House then debates and votes. Simple as that.
Will Republicans actually pull the trigger?
Honestly? Probably not – at least not successfully. Speaker Johnson has already waved it off as a “nonsense narrative,” and the 1969 Powell v. McCormack Supreme Court decision creates a genuine legal hurdle. The Court ruled that the House cannot bar elected members who meet the basic constitutional requirements of age, residency, and citizenship.
But winning the procedural fight was never really the point. The power of this maneuver is the conversation it forces. Challenge a DSA member-elect on the House floor and suddenly every Democrat has to answer a brutally direct question: Do you stand with the Constitution, or with the movement that wants to replace it?
The real fight is exposure
Rep. Tim Burchett has already declared his intention to challenge incoming socialist Darializa Avila Chevalier. Her credentials? She once bragged on social media about wiping her hands on an American flag because she couldn’t find a napkin. Charming. And she’s almost certainly heading to Congress.
The Constitution wasn’t written by people who assumed goodwill from those in power. It was built by people who understood that liberty requires vigilance. Americans who still cherish that document should demand something basic from their representatives – that when they swear to protect it, they aren’t crossing their fingers behind their back.
Key Takeaways
- A House rule allows members-elect to challenge others’ right to take the oath of office.
- The DSA’s published platform explicitly calls for replacing the entire U.S. Constitution.
- Even if the challenge fails legally, it forces Democrats to publicly defend socialist allies.
- The constitutional oath demands genuine fidelity, not performative lip service.
Sources: Fox News
