What you are pointing out, in effect, is that there can be illegal oaths of office.
I was pointing out that officials either follow their oaths of office without outside coercion, or they do not.
In my opinion, officials regularly, at best, and overwhelmingly, at worst, do not follow their oaths of office. If I am correct, any attempt to create an outside mechanism to coerce said officials into following their oaths of office will be implemented by officials who regularly, at best, and overwhelmingly, at worst, do not follow their oaths of office.
Is that an improvement over our current situation? I don't think so. If humanity could create a Deus ex machina solution, wherein oath breakers were struck down by lightening, or even retired with full pensions, but deprived of power, I would be all for it.
But giving more power to officials who regularly, at best, and overwhelmingly, at worst, abuse the powers they already have? That does not resolve the problem.