Advocating Socialist or Communist Agendas Can Be Argued as Sedition, Treason, and Perjury Under the U.S. Constitutional Oath

The Source for Freedom and Self-Reliant Information[1]

Thomas Jefferson defined rightful liberty as “unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others—I do not add ‘within the limits of the law,’ because law is often but the tyrant’s will, and always so when it violates the right of an individual.”

When elected officials or political candidates embrace socialist or communist agendas, they are not merely promoting alternative policy ideas, they are undermining the constitutional framework they swore to uphold. Such advocacy is not just ideological disagreement, it is a breach of oath, a betrayal of constitutional duty, and a criminal act.

The rationale behind this argument is set forth below, including why the Department of Justice (DOJ) has grounds to prosecute individuals, e.g., Senator Bernie Sanders and Representative Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez (AOC), who knowing promote systems incompatible with the U.S. Constitution.

Before proceeding, let’s dispel the myth that the First Amendment protects political speech, including unpopular ideologies. Advocacy alone is not illegal unless it includes perjury, incitement, coordination, or action toward overthrowing the government. This article will explain why the likes of Bernie Sanders, AOC, and many other Democrats, have betrayed their oath (perjury) and committed sedition or treason.

1. The Constitutional Oath and Its Legal Weight

Every federal and state official takes an oath to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.” This oath is NOT symbolic. It is a binding legal commitment. U.S. Const. art. VI, cl. 3.

The U.S. Constitution establishes a representative republic (U.S. Const. art. IV, § 4), not a collectivist or state-controlled economic system. This is why the likes of New York Mayor Mamdani is committing perjury, at the very least! The oath of office is further reinforced by federal statute 5 U.S.C. § 3331.

What is a representative republic or “a Republican Form of Government” guaranteed to each state? According to Roswell Hart—cited by Laurence H. Tribe, American Constitutional law, Third Edition, Vol I, 1296 (2000)—"a republican government was one

‘whose citizens shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of other citizens’; where ‘no law shall be made prohibiting the free exercise of religion’; where ‘the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed’; where ‘the right of the people to be secure in their person, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated’; and where ‘no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law’.”

Accordingly, the U.S. Constitution establishes “a Republican Form of Government,” which is applicable to members of Congress, the Executive Branch, State and local officials. Under this form of government, individual rights are protected from government intrusion. Private property rights are also protected and reinforced by the Bill of Rights (first 10 Amendments of the U.S. Constitution).

Communism and socialism require abolition of private property, centralized control of the economy, and state supremacy over individual rights—all of which contradict the United States constitutional protections.

Many socialists argue that they don’t want to abolish private property, they just want to provide a safety net for those in need, while Communism, as defined by Karl Marx, includes the following:

· Abolition of private property

· State ownership of all means of production

· Central planning

· No markets

However, Socialism and Communism are not separate species—they are points on the same continuum of state control.

In practice, Socialism results in:

· Heavy taxation of private property

· State control or regulation of major industries

· Redistribution of wealth

· Government direction of economic outcomes

If the government can tax, regulate, or control property to the point where the owner’s discretion is limited, then ownership is nominal, not real. As the late Nobel Prize Lauret, Dr. Milton Friedman, famously said: “If the government taxes corporations at 50%, then the government owns 50% of the corporation.” This was not rhetorical flourish; it was a precise economic claim.

Why? Ownership is defined by (1) Control; (2) Risk; and (3) Reward. If the government takes half the reward (profits) and dictates major decisions through regulation, then the government effectively owns a share of the enterprise.

Property taxes mean you never fully own your home—you rent if from the government indefinitely.

Rent control means the government dictates the terms of your property’s use.

Heavy regulation means the government decides how your property can be used.

Socialism is simply communism implemented gradually through taxation and regulation rather than immediate abolition of private property.

The U.S. Constitution protects:

· Private property

· Freedom of contract

· Limited government

· Free markets

Communist and Socialist systems require:

· State supremacy over private property

· Redistribution by force

· Centralized economic control

Any ideology that requires the erosion of private property rights is incompatible with the U.S. Constitution.

Therefore, a politician who openly advocates replacing the constitutional order with a socialist or communist system is advocating the destruction of the very document they swore to uphold and defend.

Such advocacy constitutes perjury, because the official is acting in direct opposition to the oath they voluntarily took.

2. Why Some Democrat’s Advocacy Constitutes Sedition

Federal law defines sedition (18 U.S. Code § 2384-2385) as:

· Advocating the overthrow of the U.S. government

· Organizing groups to replace constitutional government

· Promoting systems that abolish constitutional rights or institutions

· Distributing materials that encourage replacing constitutional government

Communism explicitly seeks to abolish:

· Private property

· Free markets

· Constitutional rights

· Separation of powers

· Multi-party elections

These goals require dismantling the constitutional order. “Democratic socialism,” which includes nationalization of industries or forced redistribution, exceeds constitutional limits, i.e., socialism and communism are not separate species; they are points on the same continuum of state control, which is prohibited by the U.S. constitution.

Advocating for socialist and communist systems cannot coexist with the U.S. Constitution and therefore, is inherently seditious.

Furthermore, there is historical precedent. The U.S. government has previously prosecuted individuals for communist advocacy:

· Dennis v. United States (1951) – Supreme Court upheld convictions of Communist Party leaders under the Smith Act for advocating Marxist revolution.

· Yates v. United States (1957) – Court limited prosecutions to advocacy of action, not abstract doctrine.

Today, political advocacy often crosses from “abstract doctrine” into policy proposals requiring constitutional overthrow.

3. The Treason Argument

Treason is defined narrowly: U.S. Const. art. III, § 3—“levying war” or “adhering to enemies, giving them aid and comfort.” Communist ideology has historically been tied to foreign adversaries:

· Soviet Union

· Maoist China

· Cuba

· North Korea

These nations have opposed U.S. interest for decades. In addition, there are U.S. Designated Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTOs):

· Hamas

· Hezbollah

· Radical Islamist Political Movements (ISIS & Al-Qaeda)

Promoting systems aligned with hostile foreign powers and terrorist groups would inherently constitute giving “aid and comfort” to ideological enemies.

Therefore, if a politician knowingly advances policies that weaken the constitutional order in favor of systems used by adversarial nations or terrorist groups, this should be construed as treasonous behavior.

During the Cold War, Congress explicitly recognized communism as a threat:

· Internal Security Act of 1950

· Communist Control Act of 1954—declared the Communist Party a threat to the U.S. government.

The ideological threat of communism during the Cold War period has not disappeared, it has simply changed form.

4. The Department of Justice (DOJ) Should Prosecute

The DOJ is responsible for enforcing federal law, including:

· Sedition Statutes (18 U.S.C. § 2384-2385)

· Treason Statutes (18 U.S.C. § 2381)

· Perjury Statutes or Oath-related violations (18 U.S.C. § 1621)

· Material support to terrorist organizations (18 U.S.C. § 2339B)

The DOJ should act when officials:

· Promote systems incompatible with the Constitution

· Violate their oath of office

· Encourage dismantling constitutional rights

· Coordinate or promote foreign adversarial ideologies

· Use public office to advance unconstitutional agendas

· Support U.S. designated terrorist organizations

· Advocate replacing constitutional law with theocratic or authoritarian systems, e.g., Sharia Law

Such investigation and prosecution would:

· Protect national security

· Reinforce the seriousness of the Oath of Office

· Prevent ideological subversion of government institutions

· Deter alignment with foreign extremist movements

· Protect citizens’ constitutional rights to include individual freedom and private property

· Prevent erosion of the American Republic from within

Conclusion

Politicians who support socialist, communist or terrorist organizations agendas are not simply offering alternative policy ideas, they are advocating systems fundamentally incompatible with the U.S. Constitution. Such advocacy violates their oath of office, constitutes sedition under federal law, and may even rise to treason when aligned with foreign adversarial ideologies.

The Department of Justice (DOJ) has both the authority and responsibility to investigate and prosecute such violations to preserve the Constitutional Republic of the United States of America.

All the great empires of the past lasted, on average, 250 years. As we are about to celebrate America’s 250th Birthday, NBC News recently conducted a survey in which they found that only 29% of Democrats were proud to be an American. This shocking revelation is evidence that the DOJ needs to get to work immediately and prosecute these Democratic Socialist Demagogues before President Trump leaves office, if we are to keep this great Nation of ours from imploding.

Dum Spiro Spero—While I breathe, I hope.

Slàinte mhath,

Robert (Mike) G. Beard Jr., C.P.A., C.G.M.A., J.D., LL.M.

[1] Each Jeffersonian Group, LLC (www.jeffersoniangroup.com) publication is intended solely for information purposes and is not intended nor does it purport to provide legal, tax, individual investment advice, estate planning advice, medical advice, insurance, or business advice. In addition, information and analysis is compiled from sources believed to be reliable but such accuracy cannot be guaranteed. Readers should do their own research and consult with expert medical, legal, tax, insurance, business, and financial counsel before taking any action.