14th Amendment, huh?

Political Nothingness for Dummies

The 14^th Amendment made everyone a “citizen,” of Washington City, District of Columbia, but the history and legality of such is dubious. You be the judge.

According to this:

"The purported Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is and should be held to be ineffective, invalid, null, void, and unconstitutional for the following reasons:

1. The Joint Resolution proposing said Amendment was not submitted to or adopted by a Constitutional Congress as required by Article 1, Section 3, and Article V of the U.S. Constitution.

2. The Joint Resolution was not submitted to the President for his approval as required by Article 1, Section 5 of the U.S. Constitution.

3. The proposed Fourteenth Amendment was rejected by more than one fourth of all the states in the Union, and it was never ratified by three fourths of all the states in the Union as required by Article V, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution.

Eleven States Unlawfully Excluded From Congress-

The U.S. Constitution provides: The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State.... No State, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate. The fact that twenty-three Senators had been unlawfully excluded from the U.S. Senate in order to secure a two thirds vote for the adoption of the Joint Resolution proposing the Fourteenth Amendment is shown by Resolutions of protest adopted by the following state Legislatures.

The New Jersey Legislature by Resolution on March 27, 1868, protested as follows: The said proposed amendment not having yet received the assent of three fourths of the states, which is necessary to make it valid, the natural and constitutional right of this state to withdraw its assent is undeniable....That it being necessary by the Constitution that every amendment to the same should be proposed by two thirds of both houses of Congress, the authors of said proposition, for the purpose of securing the assent of the requisite majority, determined to, and did, exclude from the said two houses eighty representatives from eleven states of the Union, upon the pretense that there were no such states in the Union; but, finding that two thirds of the remainder of the said houses could not be brought to assent to the said proposition, they deliberately formed and carried out the design of mutilating the integrity of the United States Senate, and without any pretext or justification, other than the possession of the power, without the right, and in the palpable violation of the Constitution, ejected a member of their own body, representing this state, and thus practically denied to New Jersey its equal suffrage in the Senate, and thereby nominally secured the vote of two thirds of the said house.

The Alabama Legislature protested against being deprived of representation in the Senate of the U.S. Congress.

The Texas Legislature, by Resolution on October 15, 1866, protested as follows: The Amendment to the Constitution proposed by this joint resolution as Article XIV is presented to the Legislature of Texas for its action thereon, under Article V of that Constitution. This Article V, providing the mode of making amendments to that instrument, contemplates the participation by all the States through their representatives in Congress, in proposing amendments. As representatives from nearly one third of the States were excluded from the Congress proposing the amendments, the constitutional requirement was not complied with; it was violated in letter and in spirit; and the proposing of these amendments to States which were excluded from all participation in their initiation in Congress, is a nullity.

The Arkansas Legislature, by Resolution on December 17, 1866, protested as follows: The Constitution authorized two thirds of both houses of Congress to propose amendments; and, as eleven States were excluded from deliberation and decision upon the one now submitted, the conclusion is inevitable that it is not proposed by legal authority, but in palpable violation of the Constitution.

The Georgia Legislature, by Resolution on November 9, 1866, protested as follows: Since the reorganization of the State government, Georgia has elected Senators and Representatives. So has every other State. They have been arbitrarily refused admission to their seats, not on the ground that the qualifications of the members elected did not conform to the fourth paragraph, second section, first Article of the Constitution, but because their right of representation was denied by a portion of the States having equal but not greater rights than themselves. They have in fact been forcibly excluded; and, inasmuch as all legislative power granted by the States to the Congress is defined, and this power of exclusion is not among the powers expressly or by implication defined, the assemblage, at the capital, of representatives from a portion of the States, to the exclusion of the representatives of another portion, cannot be a constitutional Congress, when the representation of each State forms an integral part of the whole. This amendment is tendered to Georgia for ratification, under that power in the Constitution which authorizes two thirds of the Congress to propose amendments. We have endeavored to establish that Georgia had a right, in the first place, as a part of the Congress, to act upon the question, "Shall these amendments be proposed?" Every other excluded State had the same right. The first constitutional privilege has been arbitrarily denied. Had these amendments been submitted to a constitutional Congress, they would never have been proposed to the States. Two thirds of the whole Congress never would have proposed to eleven States voluntarily to reduce their political power in the Union, and at the same time, disfranchise the larger portion of the intellect, integrity, and patriotism of eleven co-equal States.

The Florida Legislature, by Resolution on December 5, 1866, protested as follows: Let this alteration be made in the organic system and some new and more startling demands may or may not be required by the predominant party previous to allowing the ten States now unlawfully and unconstitutionally deprived of their right of representation is guaranteed by the Constitution of this country and there is no act, not even that of rebellion, can deprive them.

The South Carolina Legislature, by Resolution on November 27, 1866, protested as follows: Eleven of the Southern States, including South Carolina, are deprived of their representation in Congress. Although their Senators and Representatives have been duly elected and have presented themselves for the purpose of taking their seats, their credentials have, in most instances, been laid upon the table without being read, or have been referred to a committee, who have failed to make any report on the subject. In short, Congress has refused to exercise its Constitutional functions, and decide either upon the election, the return, or the qualification of these selected by the States and people to represent us. Some of the Senators and Representatives from the Southern States were prepared to take the test oath, but even these have been persistently ignored, and kept out of the seats to which they were entitled under the Constitution and laws. Hence this amendment has not been proposed by "two thirds of both Houses" of a legally constituted Congress, and is not, Constitutionally or legitimately, before a single Legislature for ratification.

The North Carolina Legislature, by Resolution on December 6, 1866, protested as follows: The Federal Constitution declares in substance, that Congress shall consist of a House of Representatives, composed of members apportioned among the respective States in the ratio of their population and of a Senate, composed of two members from each State. And in the Article which concerns Amendments, it is expressly provided that "no State, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate." The contemplated Amendment was not proposed to the States by a Congress thus constituted. At the time of its adoption, the eleven seceding States were deprived of representation both in the Senate and House, although they all, except the State of Texas, had Senators and Representatives duly elected and claiming their privileges under the Constitution. In consequence of this, these States had no voice on the important question of proposing the Amendment. Had they been allowed to give their votes, the proposition would doubtless have failed to command the required two thirds majority....If the votes of these States are necessary to a valid ratification of the Amendment, they were equally necessary on the question of proposing it to the States; for it would be difficult, in the opinion of the Committee, to show by what process in logic, men of intelligence, could arrive at a different conclusion. Article I, Section 7 of the United States Constitution provides that not only every bill have been passed by the House of Representatives and the Senate of the United States Congress, but that: Every order, resolution, or vote to which the concurrence of the Senate and House of Representatives may be necessary (except on a question of adjournment) shall be presented to the President of the United States; and before the same shall take effect, shall be approved by him, or being disapproved by him shall be re-passed by two thirds of the Senate and House of Representatives, according to the rules and limitations prescribed in the case of a bill. The Joint Resolution proposing the Fourteenth Amendment was never presented to the President of the United States for his approval, as President Andrew Johnson stated in his message on June 22, 1866. Therefore the Joint Resolution did not take effect. Amendment Not Ratified by Three Fourths of the States Predetermining the ineffectiveness of said Resolution, as demonstrated above, fifteen states out of the then thirty-seven states of the Union rejected the proposed Fourteenth Amendment between the date of its submission to the states by the Secretary of State on June 16, 1866, and March 24, 1868, thereby further nullifying said Resolution and making it impossible for its ratification by the constitutionally required three fourths of such states, as shown by the rejections thereof by the Legislatures of the following states:

Texas rejected the Fourteenth Amendment on October 27, 1866.

Georgia rejected it on November 9, 1866.

Florida rejected it on December 6, 1866.

Alabama rejected it on December 7, 1866.

Arkansas rejected it on December 17, 1866.

North Carolina rejected it on December 17, 1866.

South Carolina rejected it on December 20, 1866.

Kentucky rejected it on January 8, 1867.

Virginia rejected it on January 9, 1867.

Louisiana rejected it on February 6, 1867.

Delaware rejected it on February 7, 1867.

Maryland rejected it on March 23, 1867.

Mississippi rejected it on January 31, 1868.

Ohio rejected it on January 15, 1868.

New Jersey rejected it on March 24, 1868.

There is no question that all of the Southern states which rejected the Fourteenth Amendment had legally constituted governments, were fully recognized by the Federal government, and were functioning as member states of the Union at the time of their rejection.

President Andrew Johnson in his veto message of March 2, 1867, pointed out: It is not denied that the States in question have each of them an actual government with all the powers, executive, judicial, and legislative, which properly belong to a free State. They are organized like the other States of the Union, and,like them, they make, administer, and execute the laws which concern their domestic affairs. If further proof were needed that these states were operating under legally constituted governments as member states of the Union, the ratification of the Thirteenth Amendment on December 8, 1865 undoubtedly supplies this official proof. If the Southern states were not member states of the Union, the Thirteenth Amendment would not have been submitted to their Legislatures for ratification. The Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution was proposed by Joint Resolution of Congress and was approved February 1, 1865 by President Abraham Lincoln, as required by Article I, Section 7 of the United States Constitution. The President's signature is affixed to the Resolution. The Thirteenth Amendment was ratified by twenty-seven states of the then thirty-six states of the Union, including the Southern states of Virginia, Louisiana, Arkansas, South Carolina, North Carolina, Alabama, and Georgia. This is shown by the Proclamation of the Secretary of State on December 18, 1865. Without the votes of these seven Southern state Legislatures the Thirteenth Amendment would have failed. There can be no doubt but that the ratification by these seven Southern states of the Thirteenth Amendment again established the fact that their Legislatures and state governments were duly and lawfully constituted and functioning as such under their state constitutions.

Furthermore, on April 2, 1866, President Andrew Johnson issued a proclamation that stated: The insurrection which heretofore existed in the States of Georgia, South Carolina, Virginia, North Carolina, Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana, Arkansas, Mississippi, and Florida is at an end, and is henceforth to be so regarded.

On August 20, 1866, President Johnson issued another proclamation pointing out the fact that the Senate and House of Representatives had adopted identical Resolutions on July 22 and July 25, 1861, that the Civil War forced by dis-unionists of the Southern states, was not waged for the purpose of conquest or to overthrow the rights and established institutions of those states, but to defend and maintain the supremacy of the Constitution and to preserve the Union with all the equality and rights of the several states unimpaired, and that as soon as these objects were accomplished, the war ought to cease.

The President's proclamation on April 2, 1866 declared that the insurrection in the other Southern states, except Texas, no longer existed. On August 20, 1866, the President proclaimed that the insurrection in the state of Texas had been completely ended. He continued: And I do further proclaim that the said insurrection is at an end, and that peace, order, tranquility, and civil authority now exist, in and throughout the whole of the United States of America.

The state of Louisiana rejected the Fourteenth Amendment on February 6, 1867, making it the tenth state to have rejected the same, or more than one fourth of the total number of thirty-six states of the Union as of that date. Because this left less than three fourths of the states to ratify the Fourteenth Amendment, it failed of ratification in fact and in law, and it could not have been revived except by a new Joint Resolution of the Senate and House of Representatives in accordance with the constitutional requirement.

Congress Passes the Reconstruction Acts and faced with the positive failure of ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment, both Houses of Congress passed over the veto of the President three Acts, known as the Reconstruction Acts, between the dates of March 2 and July 19, 1867. The third of said Acts was designed to illegally remove with "Military force" the lawfully constituted state Legislatures of the ten Southern states of Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Arkansas, Louisiana, and Texas.”

Abrogated by Jean-Baptiste Guillory (2019)

Political shenanigans gone wild. Is it clear? Same 'ole soup warmed over? It has been a slow walk backwards, conservative family values vacated, economy gelded, with the original charter, contract, or constitution, abrogated, right along with “We the People,” the descendants, whose ancestors “signed on” to the “grand experiment.” The states united, abrogated by foreign strangers. Yep.

“There is an evil which I have seen under the sun, and it is common among men: A man to whom God hath given riches, wealth, and honour, so that he wanteth nothing for his soul of all that he desireth, yet God giveth him not power to eat thereof, but a stranger eateth it: this is vanity [unjust enrichment], and it is an evil disease...” [negotiorum gestio.]

Ecclesiastes 6

Lord have Mercy