Welcome Guest

Do you think the 14th Amendment was correctly decided

Posted on: October 30, 2018 at 10:49:04 CT
Spanky KU
Posts:
144981
Member For:
20.86 yrs
Level:
User
M.O.B. Votes:
1
in the Slaughterhouse cases (1873) when they ruled:

"(N)o one can fail to be impressed with the one pervading purpose found in (the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments), lying at the foundation of each, and without which none of them would have been even suggested; we mean the freedom of the slave race, the security and firm establishment of that freedom, and the protection of the newly-made freeman and citizen from the oppressions of those who had formerly exercised unlimited dominion over him."

or in Ex Parte Virginia (1879):

"[The 14th Amendment was] primarily designed to give freedom to persons of the African race, prevent their future enslavement, make them citizens, prevent discriminating State legislation against their rights as freemen, and secure to them the ballot."

or in Strauder v. West Virginia (1880)

"The 14th Amendment was framed and adopted ... to assure to the colored race the enjoyment of all the civil rights that, under the law, are enjoyed by white persons, and to give to that race the protection of the general government in that enjoyment whenever it should be denied by the States."

or in Elk v. Wilkins (1884):

"The main object of the opening sentence of the 14th Amendment was ... to put it beyond doubt that all persons, white or black, and whether formerly slaves or not, born or naturalized in the United States, and owing no allegiance to any alien power, should be citizens of the United States ... The evident meaning of (the words, "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof") is, not merely subject in some respect or degree to the jurisdiction of the United States, but completely subject to their political jurisdiction, and owing them direct and immediate allegiance. ... Persons not thus subject to the jurisdiction of the United States at the time of birth cannot become so afterward, except by being naturalized..."

Or do you believe United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898) somehow conferred birthright citizenship to the progeny of illegal aliens:

"[A] child born in the United States, of parents of Chinese descent, who at the time of his birth, are subjects of the emperor of China, but have a permanent domicile and residence in the United States, and... are not employed in any diplomatic or official capacity under the Emperor of China, becomes at the time of his birth a citizen of the United States."
Report Message

Please explain why this message is being reported.

REPLY

Handle:
Password:
Subject:

MESSAGE THREAD

     Big difference here that completely escapes you (surprise) - DHighlander NWMSU - 10/30 11:05:04
          nor do i. but the reality is we'll just keep kicking this - blake1771 KC - 10/30 11:42:51
     lol all you post about is race - Ragnar Danneskjold MU - 10/30 10:57:06
     Do you think the 14th Amendment was correctly decided - Spanky KU - 10/30 10:49:04
     From the guy who only posts on race. - RHAYWORTH MU - 10/30 10:46:02
     Perhaps you can cite an example of Trump trashing - TigerMatt MU - 10/30 10:42:43
          He did just threaten to amend it by eo(nm) - El-ahrairah BAMA - 10/30 10:45:13
               you have a lot to learn about Trump rhetoric. you cling - 90Tiger MU - 10/30 11:01:37
               Nope.. he is forcing a decision on illegals by SCOTUS - Spanky KU - 10/30 10:50:06
               All that does is force a legal challenge to clarify part - TigerMatt MU - 10/30 10:46:07
                    Please.. - ivan drago MU - 10/30 10:49:21
                         Please answer my question(s) - Spanky KU - 10/30 11:09:50
                         he didn't take guns without due process. he didn't - 90Tiger MU - 10/30 11:02:29
                              He didn’t do one on second amendment issues? - El-ahrairah BAMA - 10/30 11:11:24
                                   You should bother to READ what you post, especially - 90Tiger MU - 10/30 11:19:28
                    he knows how to amend the constitution - El-ahrairah BAMA - 10/30 10:49:19
                         It does not need amending if SCOTUS agrees with him - Spanky KU - 10/30 10:50:53
                              What would be your response if obama has done this? - ivan drago MU - 10/30 10:53:22
                                   applaud him (nm) - 90Tiger MU - 10/30 11:03:07
                                   I would applaud it. I don't think citizenship should - Spanky KU - 10/30 11:01:09
                                   I think we know - El-ahrairah BAMA - 10/30 10:54:25
                                        we just answered opposite of what you think you know. - 90Tiger MU - 10/30 11:03:54
                                             Do you notice the crickets? - Spanky KU - 10/30 11:29:03
     RE: Remember this? “Obama is trashing the Constitution”.. - MOCO SON MU - 10/30 10:42:23




©2025 Fanboards L.L.C. — Our Privacy Policy   About Tigerboard