Resist the State Oath of Allegiance

Include a political or religious objection in an addendum

Jimmer Endres

It is required by the Constitution of the State of California that every state employee (including supported graduate students at the University of California) sign a "State Oath of Allegiance." I resisted this requirement, and I urge others in the UC system with objections to the Oath to do the same. The purpose of this account is to provide a synopsis of the facts as I understand them in order to publicize a hitherto obscure alternative to signing the Oath in its unmodified form.

In short, moral, religious, and/or political objections may be recorded in an addendum to the Oath, provided that they do not "nullify" it.

UPDATE: In December of 1999 a review of recent addenda concluded that my October 1998 Addendum should not have been approved and I was forced to revise it. The memorandum that previously appeared on this page turned out not to be a public document and not a statement of policy, so it will no longer appear here.

The "State Oath of Allegiance"

The text of the Oath (and its requirement for state employment) is no less than Article XX, section 3 of the Constitution of the State of California. Here is the text of the Oath as it appears on the document to which I was required to affix my signature in order to receive graduate support:

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend
the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of
the State of California against all enemies, foreign and
domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the
Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the
State of California; that I take this obligation freely, without
any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will
well and faithfully discharge the duties upon which I am about
to enter. 

My particular objections aside, it is impossible to reconcile

My Addendum to the Oath

After a good amount of bureaucratic legwork, I uncovered a provision for the attachment of an addendum to the Oath articulating an apparently wide range of objections. The University Counsel at the Office of the President ultimately approves these addenda with the stipulation only that they not "nullify" the Oath.

Here is the version of my Addendum what was eventually accepted and that I signed.


ADDENDUM

It is my belief that the State Oath of Allegiance is a
disgraceful document and its requirement deeply disturbs my
conscience.  Its history and motivation are authoritarian,
antidemocratic, totalitarian, fascist, and antisocial.
Under no circumstances would I have accepted its condition
for employment had I been informed in advance.  Finally, it
seems to me a matter of logic that the Oath is
self-contradictory in that it is inconsistent with numerous
"inalienable" rights expressly guaranteed in both the
California and United States Constitutions.

1. DEMOCRATIC PRINCIPLES AND THE OATH

The text of the Oath and its requirement for employment
(including my graduate support) at the University of
California are profoundly disturbing to my conscience.  I
take them as an affront to the rights of every citizen and
antithetical to the principle of academic freedom.  They
must be viewed in the context of the long and ignominious
history of the various loyalty oaths and red scares, the
wartime internment of Japanese-American citizens, and other
attacks on citizens' rights that stain with everlasting
shame both Constitutions to which so many people today
remain required to swear loyalty.

No less than the threat of a perjury charge "punishable by
imprisonment in the state prison not less than one nor more
than 14 years" under Section 3108 of the California
Government Code looms over anyone whose scruples interfere
with his or her willingness to "take this obligation freely,
without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion."
Simultaneously, my livelihood depends on my affixing my
signature to ideas repugnant to me, and, had I been informed
in advance of this requirement, I would have absolutely
never considered matriculation at the University of
California.

It is a principle of democracy and of human freedom that the
state derives its legitimacy from the population, and that
it is granted power only to that extent.  The
converse---that citizens be granted full rights only by
proclaiming loyalty to state power---is, I think it is
clear, diametrically opposed to the whole of the democratic
tradition.  The definition of fascism is "a political
philosophy, movement, or regime that exalts nation
. . . above the individual" (Merriam-Webster 1998).
Coercion not only of behavior but also of beliefs through
the threat of imprisonment or other forms of state violence
is an expression of the totalitarian mentality at its most
extreme.

I feel the Oath pits me against an ominous and pernicious
category of unnamed, undefined "domestic enemies."  The
implication that I place myself into this category by
resisting the Oath is unmistakable to me.  This Oath and its
predecessors---and its analogues in societies unflattering
for ours even to be compared---have been very effective at
dividing the populace and intimidating and isolating
conscientious, honest, law-abiding dissidents.

Consequently I strongly believe that the Oath articulates an
explicitly fascist, explicitly antisocial vision.

2. CONSTITUTIONAL GUARANTEES AND THE OATH

Article I of the Constitution of California guarantees the
following: "All people are by nature free and independent
and have inalienable rights.  Among these are enjoying and
defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing, and
protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining safety,
happiness, and privacy" (Section 1).  "Every person may
freely speak . . . his or her sentiments on all
subjects. . . ."  This guarantee necessarily includes the
right freely to hold beliefs (Section 2). "Free exercise and
enjoyment of religion without discrimination or preference
are guaranteed," obviously including my deep moral beliefs
as described in this Addendum, cited as a "liberty of
conscience" (Section 4).  "A person may not be disqualified
from entering or pursuing . . . employment because of sex,
race, creed, color, or national or ethnic origin" (Section
8).  It is in my view, then, clear that the Oath
and its requirement deny me my freedom, attempt to deprive
me of property and livelihood, violate my privacy, attempt
to legislate my beliefs under threat of imprisonment, and
threaten to deny me employment on the basis of creed, thus
repeatedly and directly violating, to the letter, numerous
specific rights guaranteed by the same document that
contains the text of the Oath (Article XX, Section 3).

The First Amendment of the Constitution of the United
States, of course, guarantees every citizen's right to
freedom of "religion," again including the beliefs discussed
above, and "freedom of speech," obviously circumscribing
freedom of opinion.  It is in my view obvious that the Oath
violates these rights.

Finally, it must be noted---must be insisted---that human
rights are intrinsic and inalienable; they are emphatically
not granted by governments through constitutions or any
other means.  To repeat, our political ideal is the precise
opposite: governments are granted any and all rights and
power by the assent of the governed.  Nonetheless, in my
opinion the Oath contradicts itself in its own terms as it
cannot be consistent with rights explicitly guaranteed by
both constitutions which it apparently seeks to protect.

Conclusion

I hope that others who are hesitant to sign the Oath in order to begin or continue employment at the University of California will be encouraged and assisted by this account. Please email questions or comments.

Further information

  1. Seth Schoen and Californians for Academic Freedom are coordinating efforts to publicize and resist the Oath.

  2. Matthew Belmonte, a graduate student in Neuroscience, fought the Oath years ago.

  3. Kim Hansen, graduate student in sociology, is fighting the Oath now (December 1999--coverage in the Guardian).

  4. The UC History Project and the Center for Studies in Higher Education held a symposium at Berkeley in October 1999 to mark the 50th anniversary of the original Oath controversy.

  5. Michelle Locke of the Associated Press wrote a story on the Oath in October 1999 that includes a very good historical synopsis.

Appendix

California Constitution: Article XX, Section 3

See the full text of the Constitution of California. See also Matthew Belmonte's collection of legislation related to the Oath.

Academic employees of the University of California are required only to attest to the first paragraph of the Oath (bold, below).

CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION
ARTICLE 20  MISCELLANEOUS SUBJECTS

SEC. 3.  Members of the Legislature, and all public officers and
employees, executive, legislative, and judicial, except such inferior
officers and employees as may be by law exempted, shall, before they
enter upon the duties of their respective offices, take and
subscribe the following oath or affirmation:

       "I, ______, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support
     and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Consti-
     tution of the State of California against all enemies, foreign
     and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the
     Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the
     State of California; that I take this obligation freely, without
     any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will
     well and faithfully discharge the duties upon which I am about
     to enter.
       "And I do further swear (or affirm) that I do not advocate, nor
     am I a member of any party or organization, political or other-
     wise, that now advocates the overthrow of the Government of the
     United States or of the State of California by force or violence
     or other unlawful means; that within the five years immediately
     preceding the taking of this oath (or affirmation) I have not
     been a member of any party or organization, political or other-
     wise, that advocated the overthrow of the Government of the
     United States or of the State of California by force or violence
     or other unlawful means except as follows:
     ________________________________________________________________
         (If no affiliations, write in the words "No Exceptions")
     and that during such time as I hold the office of ______________
     ________________________________ I will not advocate nor become
             (name of office)
     a member of any party or organization, political or otherwise,
     that advocates the overthrow of the Government of the United
     States or of the State of California by force or violence or
     other unlawful means."

   And no other oath, declaration, or test, shall be required as a
qualification for any public office or employment.
   "Public officer and employee" includes every officer and employee
of the State, including the University of California, every county,
city, city and county, district, and authority, including any
department, division, bureau, board, commission, agency, or
instrumentality of any of the foregoing.

Jimmer Endres / jendres@berkeley.edu / 2000-02-14