    [Constitution, Jefferson's Manual, and the Rules of the House of Representatives, 119th Congress]
    [119th Congress]
    [House Document 118-187]
    [The United States Constitution]
    [Pages 89-94]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

                                   ARTICLE VI.

    Sec. 194. Validity of debts and engagements.

      \1\ All  Debts
    contracted and Engagements entered into, before the Adoption of this
    Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this
    Constitution, as under the Confederation.

    [[Page 90]]

    Sec. 195. Constitution, laws, and treaties the
    supreme law of the land.

      \2\ This  Constitution, and the Laws of the United
    States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made,
    or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall
    be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be
    bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the
    Contrary notwithstanding.

    Sec. 196. Oaths of public officers; and prohibition of
    religious tests.

      \3\ The  Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and
    the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and
    judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States,
    shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but
    no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any
    Office or public Trust under the United States.

    Sec. 197. Form of oath.

      The  form of the oath is prescribed
    by statute (5 U.S.C. 3331; I, 128): ``I, AB, 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.''

    Sec. 198. Administration of oath at organization.

      The  Act of
    June 1, 1789 (2 U.S.C. 25), provides that on the organization of the
    House and previous to entering on any other business the oath shall be
    administered by any Member (generally the Member with longest continuous
    service) (I, 131; VI, 6) to the Speaker and by the Speaker to the other
    Members and the Clerk (I, 130). The Act has at times been considered in
    the House as directory merely (I, 118, 242, 243, 245; VI, 6); but at
    other times has been observed carefully (I, 118, 140). The Act was cited
    by the Clerk in recognizing for nominations for Speaker as being of
    higher constitutional privilege than a resolution to postpone the
    election of a Speaker and instead provide for the election of a Speaker
    pro tempore pending the disposition of certain ethics charges against
    the nominee of the majority party (Precedents (Wickham), ch. 1,
    Sec. 4.1).

    [[Page 91]]

    committee; introduction and numbering of measures; submission of items
    to the Congressional Record; co-sponsorship of measures; and non-voting
    participation in floor proceedings (Precedents (Wickham), ch. 5,
    Sec. 18.21). During an ongoing public health emergency the Speaker
    announced that the oath would be administered to Members-elect in small,
    pre-arranged groups in order to adhere to restrictions on the number of
    persons permitted in the House chamber consistent with guidance from the
    Office of Attending Physician (Jan. 3, 2021, p. _).
      Previously it was the custom to administer the oath by State
    delegations, but beginning with the 71st Congress Members-elect have
    been sworn in en masse (VI, 8). The Clerk supplies printed copies of the
    oath to Members and Delegates who have taken the oath in accordance with
    law, which shall be subscribed by the Members and Delegates and
    delivered to the Clerk to be recorded in the Journal and Congressional
    Record as conclusive proof of the fact that the signer duly took the
    oath in accordance with law (2 U.S.C. 25). See Deschler, ch. 2. Where
    two Members-elect participated in various House and committee business
    before taking the oath of office, the House adopted a resolution (1)
    correcting the results of record votes to remove mention of them, and
    (2) ratifying the following activities involving one or both of them:
    election to and participation in standing

    Sec. 199. Functions of the Speaker in administering the
    oath.

      The  Speaker possesses no arbitrary power in the administration of
    the oath (I, 134), and when objection is made the question must be
    decided by the House and not by the Chair (I, 519, 520). An objection
    prevents the Speaker from administering the oath of his own authority,
    even though the credentials be regular in form (I, 135-138). The Speaker
    has frequently declined to administer the oath in cases wherein the
    House has, by its action, indicated that the Speaker should not do so
    (I, 139, 140). And in case of doubt the Speaker has waited the
    instruction of the House (I, 396; VI, 11). There has been discussion as
    to the competency of a Speaker pro tempore to administer the oath (I,
    170), and in the absence of the Speaker a Member-elect waited until the
    Speaker could be present (I, 179), but in 1920 a Speaker pro tempore
    whose designation by the Speaker had been approved by the House,
    administered the oath (VI, 20). The House may authorize the Speaker to
    administer the oath away from the House (I, 169), or may, in such a
    case, authorize another than the Speaker to administer the oath (I, 170;
    VI, 14). For forms used in this procedure, see VI, 14. On one occasion,
    the Speaker requested that guests in the gallery rise with the Members
    during the administration of the oath of office to a Member-elect
    (Precedents (Wickham), ch. 4, Sec. 4.9).

    Sec. 200. Administration of the oath as related
    to the quorum.

      Members-elect  have been sworn at the beginning of a second session
    before the ascertainment of a quorum (I, 176-178), but when the Clerk
    called the second session of the 87th Congress to order, Members-elect
    were not sworn before ascertainment of a quorum and election of Speaker
    McCormack to succeed Speaker Rayburn, who had died during the
    adjournment sine die (Jan. 10, 1962, p. 5). Members-elect have also been
    sworn where a roll call or other ascertainment has shown the absence of
    a quorum (I, 178, 181, 182; VI, 21) but in one instance, however, the
    Speaker declined to administer the oath under such circumstances (II,
    875).

    [[Page 92]]

    in the absence of a quorum (VI, 22), on Calendar Wednesday (VI, 22),
    before a pending motion to amend the Journal (I, 171), and after the
    previous question has been ordered on a bill reported back to the House
    from the Committee of the Whole (Oct. 3, 1969, p. 28487) or pending
    engrossment and third reading (Precedents (Wickham), ch. 2, Sec. 3.19).
    A division being demanded on a resolution seating several claimants, the
    oath may be administered to each as soon as his case is decided (I,
    623). If a Member-elect whose right to a seat has been determined by the
    House is present to take the oath, the right to be sworn is complete and
    cannot be deferred even by a motion to adjourn (I, 622), but the Speaker
    has entertained the motion to adjourn after adoption of a seating
    resolution but before the Member-elect was present in the Chamber to
    take the oath (Precedents (Wickham), ch. 2, Sec. 3.17).

    Sec. 201. Privilege of administration of the
    oath.

      A  proposition to administer the oath is a matter of high privilege
    (VI, 14). It has been administered during a call of the roll and during
    an electronic vote on a motion to agree to rules at the time of
    organization (I, 173; VI, 22; Precedents (Wickham), ch. 2, Sec. 3.20)
    and during an electronic vote taken during House deliberations
    interlocutory to an ongoing joint session to count the electoral votes
    (Precedents (Wickham), ch. 2, Sec. 3.21). It also has been administered
    before the reading of the Journal (I, 172),

    Sec. 202. Challenge of the right to take the oath.

      The  right
    of a Member-elect to take the oath is sometimes challenged, usually at
    the time of organization of the House. The challenge may be made by a
    Member-elect who has not yet taken the oath (I, 141). The Member
    challenging does so on his responsibility as a Member or on the strength
    of documents (I, 448) or on both (I, 443, 474). And where an objection
    was sustained neither by affidavit nor on the responsibility of the
    Member objecting, the House declined to entertain it (I, 455).

    [[Page 93]]

    Sec. 203. Consideration of an objection to the taking of
    the oath.

      It  has been held, although not uniformly, that in cases in
    which the right of a Member-elect to take the oath is challenged, the
    Speaker may direct the Member to abstain temporarily (I, 143-146, 474;
    VI, 9, 174; VIII, 3386). The Member so challenged is not thereby
    deprived of any right (I, 155). Similarly, the seating of a Member-elect
    does not prejudice a pending contest, brought under the Federal
    Contested Elections Act (2 U.S.C. 381-396), over final right to the seat
    (Jan. 7, 1997, p. 120; Precedents (Wickham), ch. 2, Sec. 2.3). When
    several are challenged and abstain, the question is first taken on the
    Member-elect first required to abstain (I, 147, 148), but when a Member-
    elect challenged the right of all Members-elect from six states to take
    the oath, the House adopted a privileged resolution authorizing and
    directing the Speaker to administer the oath to all Members-elect prior
    to the administration of the oath to Members-elect en masse (Jan. 3,
    2021, p. _). In 1861 it was held that the House might direct contested
    names to be passed over until the other Members-elect had been sworn in
    (I, 154). Motions and debate are in order on the questions involved in a
    challenge, and in a few cases other business has intervened by unanimous
    consent (I, 149, 150). By unanimous consent the consideration of a
    challenge is sometimes deferred until after the completion of the
    organization (I, 474), and by unanimous consent also the House has
    sometimes proceeded to legislative business pending consideration of the
    right of a Member to be sworn (I, 151, 152).

    Sec. 204. Relation of credentials to the right to
    take the oath.

      Although  the House has emphasized the impropriety of swearing a
    Member without credentials (I, 162-168), yet it has been done in cases
    in which the credentials are delayed or lost and there is no doubt of
    the election (I, 85, 176-178; VI, 12, 13), or in which the governor of a
    State has declined to give credentials to a person whose election was
    undoubted and uncontested (I, 553). A certificate of election in due
    form having been filed, the Clerk placed the name of the Member-elect on
    the roll, although he was subsequently advised that a State Supreme
    Court had issued a writ restraining the Secretary of State from issuing
    such certificate (Jan. 3, 1949, p. 8). If the prima facie right is
    contested the Speaker declines to administer the oath (I, 550), but the
    House admits on a prima facie showing, and without regard to final
    right, a Member-elect from a recognized constituency whose credentials
    are in due form and whose qualifications are unquestioned (I, 528-534).
    If the status of the constituency is in doubt, the House usually defers
    the oath (I, 361, 386, 448, 461). In the 99th Congress, the House
    declined to give prima facie effect to a certificate of election, the
    results of the election being in doubt, and referred the issue of
    initial as well as final right to the Committee on House Administration
    (Precedents (Wickham), ch. 2, Sec. 4.1). After a recount of the votes
    was conducted by that committee, the House on its recommendation
    declared the candidate without the certificate entitled to the seat
    (Precedents (Wickham), ch. 2, Sec. 3.8). The House also may defer the
    oath when a question of qualifications arises (I, 474), but it may
    investigate qualifications after the oath is taken (I, 156-159, 420,
    462, 481), and after investigation unseat the Member by majority vote
    (I, 428). On one occasion when a Member-elect's credentials were in due
    form but there was a question as to whether the Member-elect held an
    incompatible office, the House resolved the matter by adopting a
    privileged resolution authorizing and directing the Speaker to
    administer the oath to the Member-elect (Precedents (Smith), ch. 7,
    Sec. 4.3; see Sec. 98, supra). For an insertion by the Speaker, in
    concurrence with the Minority Leader, on this matter and relevant
    precedents, see Precedents (Smith), ch. 7, Sec. 4,3.

    [[Page 94]]

    the exclusion by a State legislature of a member-elect of that body was
    unconstitutional, where the legislature had asserted the power to judge
    the sincerity with which the Member-elect could take the oath to support
    the Constitution of the United States. In the 97th Congress, the House
    declared vacant by majority vote the seat of a Member-elect unable to
    take the oath because of illness, in which the medical prognosis showed
    no likelihood of improvement to permit the Member-elect to take the oath
    or assume the duties of a Representative (Precedents (Smith), ch. 7,
    Sec. 6.8).

    Sec. 205. Sanity, loyalty, and incapacity as related
    to the oath.

      Questions  of sanity (I, 441) and loyalty (I, 448) seem to pertain
    to competency to take the oath as a question of qualifications, although
    there has been not a little debate on this subject (I, 479). In one case
    a Member-elect who had not taken the oath was excluded from the House
    because of disloyalty, in which the resolution of exclusion and the
    committee report thereon concluded that he was ineligible to take a seat
    as a Representative under the express provisions of section 3 of the
    14th amendment (VI, 56-59). This action by the House was cited in the
    Supreme Court decision of Powell v. McCormack, 395 U.S. 486, 545 fn. 83
    (1969), which denied the power of the House to exclude Members-elect by
    a majority vote for other than failure to meet the express
    qualifications stated in the Constitution. In Bond v. Floyd, 385 U.S.
    116 (1966), the Supreme Court held that

    Sec. 206. Decisions of the Court.

      Decisions  of the Supreme
    Court of the United States: McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 U.S. (4 Wheat.)
    316 (1819); Ex parte Garland, 71 U.S. (4 Wall.) 333 (1867); Davis v.
    Beason, 133 U.S. 333 (1890); Mormon Church  v. United States, 136 U.S. 1
    (1890).