Immigration Agency: New Citizens No Longer Need to Pledge to Bear Arms to Defend the United States

Another scathingly brilliant idea from the president’s minions — this one, a real winner.

All new citizens take the oath of allegiance upon becoming naturalized Americans:


I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God.

The oath has been unchanged since 1929, and such oaths have been required upon naturalization since at least 1795.

But in looking around for more “transformations” of America that can be effected, Obama’s busy-bee bureaucrats found the oath of allegiance a perfect target.

So the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services said on Thursday that it would no longer require new citizens to pledge that they will “bear arms on behalf of the United States” or “perform noncombatant service” in the armed forces as part of the naturalization process.


Washington Examiner:

Those lines are in the Oath of Allegiance that people recite as they become U.S. citizens. But USCIS said people “may” be able to exclude those phrases for reasons related to religion or if they have a conscientious objection.

USCIS said people with certain religious training or with a “deeply held moral or ethical code” may not have to say the phrases as they are naturalized.

The agency said people don’t have to belong to a specific church or religion to use this exemption, and may attest to U.S. officials administering the oath that they have these beliefs.

USCIS said it would take “feedback” on this policy change through August 4, 2015.

A big deal? In the large scheme of things, probably not. But as a metaphor for the Obama administration, you can’t find a better example.

“It’s not broke, but fix it anyway” should be their slogan. The financial industry’s hubris and swashbuckling business practices of questionable legality led to the credit meltdown of 2008. Their solution? Saddle consumers with a gigantic new intrusive federal agency — the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau — that makes it harder to get loans and puts financial managers in the cross hairs, while sidling up to the big banks and making sure they are too big to fail. More modest reforms, while making sure the big banks didn’t have a taxpayer “Get out of Bankruptcy” card to play, was what was needed.

Obamacare? The insurance industry needed some reform but imposing this template for government-run healthcare by imposing the Obamacare monstrosity on us was totally unnecessary.


As for the Iran deal, once again, what would have been the problem with simply continuing to allow the sanctions to work? Iran came to the table because they were in danger of an economic meltdown. Such an event may have even led to the downfall of the theocracy. So we negotiate a treaty that invites Iran to continue to work for the bomb, while giving them a $100 billion windfall.

Mucking around with the oath of allegiance isn’t surprising at all in that context. It’s tradition, and it hits the military, so if you’re an Obama supporter, what’s not to like?

No, it’s not a big deal. But dozens of these assaults on traditional America add up to the kind of “transformation” Obama promised when he was elected.


Trending on PJ Media Videos

Join the conversation as a VIP Member