Constitutional Conflict

The next President will take the oath of office on January 20, 2017. If it is me, I see a Constitutional conflict. The oath is, "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

The key words in that oath, in my opinion are, "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States." That is, in my opinion, the primary duty of the President. Others might say the most important words are, " I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States." The job of the President is to execute the laws passed Congress. Of course, that is true. That is why the branch of Government the President presides over is called the Executive Branch. However, what if there are laws passed by Congress, and signed by previous Presidents that are unconstitutional? Wouldn't that set up a conflict? How can a President "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution and at the same time execute unconstitutional laws? Maybe that's the reason for the, "best of my Ability," clause.

"The best of my Ability," clause indicates to me that not many Presidents in recent Administrations has had too much ability in preserving, protecting, and defending the Constitution.

For example, I believe all gun control laws are unconstitutional. How could I carry out or enforce those laws? My answer to that is, when I am President, I wouldn't. I believe it is unconstitutional for a President to carry out unconstitutional laws.

I know there are those that would disagree with this, but I am hoping the majority will agree. Getting back to the Constitution is the way to rescue America.