Can I sign a Loyalty Oath?

[F3MTL 9]

Hi, I’m a green card holder and was offered employment with a state agency in Arizona. Upon completing the onboarding documents, one of the requirements was to sign a “Loyalty Oath”, but I wasn’t sure if I could actually sign this. 

 

The form says aliens are exempt from compliance with the oath, but my hiring manager said all employees must sign it, however I was told to reach out to my HR for any questions. Now I’m confused on what to do with that part of the onboarding. 

 

Should I just leave it blank? 

[Boiler 43,718]

Loyalty to what?

[F3MTL 9]

1 minute ago, Boiler said:

Loyalty to what?

“Before candidates elected to office or employees of the state may begin work, they must take a loyalty oath of office. In the oath the candidate elect or employee solemnly swears or affirms they will support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution and laws of the state of Arizona and defend the U.S. and Arizona against all enemies, foreign and domestic, and states they will faithfully and impartially discharge the duties of their office.” 

 

Extracted from https://azsos.gov/services/public-information/loyalty-oath-office.

 

This is essentially what I have to sign off on.

[Mike E 11,726]

Why do you think you are not allowed to sign that?

[F3MTL 9]

4 minutes ago, Mike E said:

Why do you think you are not allowed to sign that?

Because the form has a section that says aliens are exempt from compliance with it. And I wouldn’t want this to affect my application when applying for citizenship down the line.

[Lemonslice 4,583]

That's when you ask your boss to verify with HR. My job as something similar, citizens do A, non-citizens do B. 

[F3MTL 9]

2 minutes ago, Lemonslice said:

That's when you ask your boss to verify with HR. My job as something similar, citizens do A, non-citizens do B. 

So I emailed my hiring manager and she got in contact with HR and said all employees must sign in. So I’m a bit conflicted now since the form says aliens are exempt from it. She said I can also contact HR and double check so I’m going to do that. 

 

From my understanding though, if the form says aliens are exempt from it, I’m thinking I could just leave that section blank

[Lemonslice 4,583]

47 minutes ago, F3MTL said:

So I emailed my hiring manager and she got in contact with HR and said all employees must sign in. So I’m a bit conflicted now since the form says aliens are exempt from it. She said I can also contact HR and double check so I’m going to do that. 

 

From my understanding though, if the form says aliens are exempt from it, I’m thinking I could just leave that section blank

Just ask. Highlight the part about the exemption, and explain that is exactly what you are, so it seems it would apply to you.

 

However, nothing in the declaration says "as a citizen, I will...". So, I don't think it's a big deal either way. 

[F3MTL 9]

16 minutes ago, Lemonslice said:

Just ask. Highlight the part about the exemption, and explain that is exactly what you are, so it seems it would apply to you.

 

However, nothing in the declaration says "as a citizen, I will...". So, I don't think it's a big deal either way. 

Okay, thanks. I’ll ask this week. 

 

I was just curious because the Loyalty Oath had similar wording to the Oath of Allegiance.

[Lemonslice 4,583]

1 minute ago, F3MTL said:

Okay, thanks. I’ll ask this week. 

 

I was just curious because the Loyalty Oath had similar wording to the Oath of Allegiance.

It does.  The reason you're exempt is probably because they can't have you do (some of) those things legally.  But I don't think signing would get you in trouble. 

[JeanneAdil 6,244]

Seems Arizona has oaths for public office 

don't be surprised if they also have a confidentiality document u may need to sign if u r hired

 

Sign it if u want the job 

 

Oaths for public officials not in the employ of the state are with the jurisdiction in which they were elected or appointed. For example, the oath of a county supervisor would be with the county recorder; and, oaths for town or municipal corporation officers or employees are filed in the respective office of the employing board, commission or agency of the city, town or municipal corporation. Oaths for school district and public education institution employees can be found with the district or institution.

[Lemonslice 4,583]

19 minutes ago, JeanneAdil said:

Seems Arizona has oaths for public office 

don't be surprised if they also have a confidentiality document u may need to sign if u r hired

 

Sign it if u want the job 

 

Oaths for public officials not in the employ of the state are with the jurisdiction in which they were elected or appointed. For example, the oath of a county supervisor would be with the county recorder; and, oaths for town or municipal corporation officers or employees are filed in the respective office of the employing board, commission or agency of the city, town or municipal corporation. Oaths for school district and public education institution employees can be found with the district or institution.

People can, and should, ask questions before signing documents. Especially when the document itself states that they're exempt.  This is not servitude, no need to bend over and little themselves.  They're competent, already got the job, and they are asking a reasonable question.

Edited February 13, 2023 by Lemonslice

[telso 16]

Your warning bells were well attuned, because unless you're to be a college faculty member, you should tread carefully. The link to the oath you posted has links to the code section implementing it, which says, in part:

Quote

D. Any of the persons referred to in article XVIII, section 10, Constitution of Arizona, as amended, relating to the employment of aliens, are exempted from any compliance with this section.

And if you go to that constitutional section, it lists college faculty as some the people the code section refers to, so if that's your job then you're exempt, and you can point HR to it, but presumably the college HR people would know this exception well. The other relevant people are teachers on exchange and prisoners. More worryingly, it starts with:

Quote

Section 10. No person not a citizen or ward of the United States shall be employed upon or in connection with any state, county or municipal works or employment....

I could not find anything about this elsewhere, but Arizona is not the most friendly state to immigrants, with or without papers. Unless this constitutional section has been overturned by a court, you may not be able to work for state or local government in Arizona as an LPR. As well, it's possible that somewhere in the process you attested that you meet all qualifications for this job, which, implicitly, seemingly requires you to be a US citizen.

 

I would make sure that legal counsel at HR is made aware of this constitutional provision and attests that it is non-applicable to your case, rather than trusting a mid level administrator. And especially if it is applicable, I would make sure that you document this all on paper (email), and that you make clear that you are not a citizen, that you did not notice any requirements to be a citizen during the application process and that if they were there you did not see it and so did not willfully lie about your citizenship status, that as soon as you became aware of this you explicitly affirmed you were not a citizen, and that you never had any intent to claim citizenship and always did the opposite. (You could, after this is all over, FOIA all this so you have the record from them, not just your email.) Hopefully that, combined with not actually starting the job and so not actually gaining a benefit (salary), should keep you from making the cardinal sin of immigration law.

I hope you do get to accept this job, but you did a good thing when you saw this language and got worried about it. Let this be a lesson to everyone to read documents you sign, and if it sounds like something for a citizen, be absolutely sure it's not.

[F3MTL 9]

58 minutes ago, telso said:

Your warning bells were well attuned, because unless you're to be a college faculty member, you should tread carefully. The link to the oath you posted has links to the code section implementing it, which says, in part:

And if you go to that constitutional section, it lists college faculty as some the people the code section refers to, so if that's your job then you're exempt, and you can point HR to it, but presumably the college HR people would know this exception well. The other relevant people are teachers on exchange and prisoners. More worryingly, it starts with:

I could not find anything about this elsewhere, but Arizona is not the most friendly state to immigrants, with or without papers. Unless this constitutional section has been overturned by a court, you may not be able to work for state or local government in Arizona as an LPR. As well, it's possible that somewhere in the process you attested that you meet all qualifications for this job, which, implicitly, seemingly requires you to be a US citizen.

 

I would make sure that legal counsel at HR is made aware of this constitutional provision and attests that it is non-applicable to your case, rather than trusting a mid level administrator. And especially if it is applicable, I would make sure that you document this all on paper (email), and that you make clear that you are not a citizen, that you did not notice any requirements to be a citizen during the application process and that if they were there you did not see it and so did not willfully lie about your citizenship status, that as soon as you became aware of this you explicitly affirmed you were not a citizen, and that you never had any intent to claim citizenship and always did the opposite. (You could, after this is all over, FOIA all this so you have the record from them, not just your email.) Hopefully that, combined with not actually starting the job and so not actually gaining a benefit (salary), should keep you from making the cardinal sin of immigration law.

I hope you do get to accept this job, but you did a good thing when you saw this language and got worried about it. Let this be a lesson to everyone to read documents you sign, and if it sounds like something for a citizen, be absolutely sure it's not.

Hi, thanks so much for letting me know about this.

 

I actually found this case about a very similar situation online (https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/351/735/2594870/). This one is over 50 years old. I’m not sure if it relates to my case but it does say  

“1. Art. 18, Sec. 10 and Sec. 38-201, subsec. B and all Regulations and Directives promulgated thereunder are unconstitutional in that the enforcement thereof by the defendants as aforesaid deprive Maria and Marion of their respective rights and immunities under the Equal Protection Clause and further, contravene the Supremacy Clause.”

 

I guess the best course of action is to get in touch with HR now? 

[telso 16]

13 minutes ago, F3MTL said:

I actually found this case about a very similar situation online (https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/351/735/2594870/).

That's actually exactly what I was contemplating. The Supreme Court summarily affirmed that ruling, meaning it did not even feel the need to hold a hearing, so it is indisputable that that constitutional provision is inoperative. There is a good list of cases and opinions with similar outcomes (click on summaries or citing cases). So that's pretty conclusive, and you're safe taking the job.

 

The issue, then, is how this oath is affected by the court invalidation of the citizenship/alien requirement referenced in the exemption. One could say that since the constitutional section is invalid, the exemption is invalid, so everyone must take the oath (just eliminate subsection D). Conversely, one could say that since the exemption is still valid for faculty who are aliens, what the courts could do was say every alien should be treated as faculty are, so all aliens are exempt (rewrite subsection D as "Any of the persons, relating to the employment of aliens, are exempted from any compliance with this section."). Legally speaking, it is whether the courts would read down or read in the law: do you narrow or broaden the exemption, or narrow or broaden the law. (Also, fun fact, the U.S. Supreme Court invalidated a broader version of this oath, which banned joining any organization that did anything ad, but that language has been removed.)

At this point, though the oath was originally required in a way that only citizens could take it, it's now unclear, but you don't have to affirm citizenship in saying it, so if you want you can just do it and not worry. Or you can press someone at HR or the AG/SOS office who is a lawyer to pronounce on this before doing it. Or you can hire a lawyer and try to get this settled, but that seems like overkill. Lastly, it would be nice to contact your state legislators and ask them to fix this law, which references an invalid part of the state constitution, and maybe even repeal that invalid section of the constitution. Good luck!