The Black Vault Message Forums

Discover the Truth!        

Government and Political Conspiracies

THE UNCONSTITUTIONALITY OF THE 14th AMENDMENT

Throughout time, there have been countless government and political conspiracies that have kept us wondering. This forum is dedicated to that very topic. Got a conspiracy theory of your own? Post it, and try to back it up as best you can!

Postby AlphaOmega » Sat Jan 16, 2010 7:00 pm

There is No "Fourteenth Amendment"!
by
David Lawrence
U.S. News & World Report
September 27, 1957

A MISTAKEN BELIEF — that there is a valid article in the Constitution known as the "Fourteenth Amendment" — is responsible for the Supreme Court decision of 1954 and the ensuing controversy over desegregation in the public schools of America. No such amendment was ever legally ratified by three fourths of the States of the Union as required by the Constitution itself. The so-called "Fourteenth Amendment" was dubiously proclaimed by the Secretary of State on July 20, 1868. The President shared that doubt. There were 37 States in the Union at the time, so ratification by at least 28 was necessary to make the amendment an integral part of the Constitution. Actually, only 21 States legally ratified it. So it failed of ratification.

The undisputed record, attested by official journals and the unanimous writings of historians, establishes these events as occurring in 1867 and 1868:

1. Outside the South, six States — New Jersey, Ohio, Kentucky, California, Delaware and Maryland — failed to ratify the proposed amendment.
2. In the South, ten States — Texas, Arkansas, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Florida, Mississippi and Louisiana — by formal action of their legislatures, rejected it under the normal processes of civil law.
3. A total of 16 legislatures out of 37 failed legally to ratify the "Fourteenth Amendment."
4. Congress — which had deprived the Southern States of their seats in the Senate — did not lawfully pass the resolution of submission in the first instance.
5. The Southern States which had rejected the amendment were coerced by a federal statute passed in 1867 that took away the right to vote or hold office from all citizens who had served in the Confederate Army. Military governors were appointed and instructed to prepare the roll of voters. All this happened in spite of the presidential proclamation of amnesty previously issued by the President. New legislatures were thereupon chosen and forced to "ratify" under penalty of continued exile from the Union. In Louisiana, a General sent down from the North presided over the State legislature.
6. Abraham Lincoln had declared many times that the Union was "inseparable" and "indivisible." After his death, and when the war was over, the ratification by the Southern States of the Thirteenth Amendment, abolishing slavery, had been accepted as legal. But Congress in the 1867 law imposed the specific conditions under which the Southern States would be "entitled to representation in Congress."
7. Congress, in passing the 1867 law that declared the Southern States could not have their seats in either the Senate or House in the next session unless they ratified the "Fourteenth Amendment," took an unprecedented step. No such right — to compel a State by an act of Congress to ratify a constitutional amendment — is to be found anywhere in the Constitution. Nor has this procedure ever been sanctioned by the Supreme Court of the United States.
8. President Andrew Johnson publicly denounced this law as unconstitutional. But it was passed over his veto.
9. Secretary of State Seward was on the spot in July 1868 when the various "ratifications" of a spurious nature were placed before him. The legislatures of Ohio and New Jersey had notified him that they rescinded their earlier action of ratification. He said in his official proclamation that he was not authorized as Secretary of State "to determine and decide doubtful questions as to the authenticity of the organization of State legislatures or as to the power of any State legislature to recall a previous act or resolution of ratification." He added that the amendment was valid "if the resolutions of the legislatures of Ohio and New Jersey, ratifying the aforesaid amendment, are to be deemed as remaining of full force and effect, notwithstanding the subsequent resolutions of the legislatures of these States." This was a very big "if." It will be noted that the real issue, therefore, is not only whether the forced "ratification" by the ten Southern States was lawful, but whether the withdrawal by the legislatures of Ohio and New Jersey — two Northern States — was legal. The right of a State, by action of its legislature, to change its mind at any time before the final proclamation of ratification is issued by the Secretary of State has been confirmed in connection with other constitutional amendments.
10. The Oregon Legislature in October 1868 — three months after the Secretary's proclamation was issued — passed a rescinding resolution, which argued that the "Fourteenth Amendment" had not been ratified by three fourths of the States and that the "ratifications" in the Southern States were "usurpations, unconstitutional, revolutionary and void" and that, "until such ratification is completed, any State has a right to withdraw its assent to any proposed amendment."
More at http://www.constitution.org/14ll/no14th.htm
The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. -Thomas Jefferson
Copies of all my posts are now kept on file.
AlphaOmega
 
Posts: 238
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2009 2:59 am

Postby AlphaOmega » Sat Jan 16, 2010 7:53 pm

The Links I have posted are from reliable sources of high credibility.

Jaydeehess I posted the links to create discussion and for information purposes...I posted links only because of the fact that the information on the pages is quite long...at one link to copy and paste creates 122 pages in Word. So you could could understand why I only posted links.

I have refrained from commenting because I had feeling Greeney2 would do what he got caught red handed doing.

So all I asked or indeed ask of anyone reading this topic is to read all the documentation completely before commenting.

The reason I say this is because what a lot of people do not understand is that Under the provisions of the Constitution as originally written the states are independent and Sovereign States with their own State Constitutions. They send Representatives and Senators which, make up the House and Senate (This is the Federal Government).

So in essence The States are Independent of the United States and members of a Federation ( The United States of America).

The independence of the States means that the citizenry of each state are citizen of that state under the U.S Constitution (as it was originally penned) who by the virtue of membership in the Union by their state become U.S Citizens as they and their state is represented in the Federation which is the Federal Government.

Article 4 is very clear on this issue and I draw your attention to the highlighted which have not been repealed or replaced. Section 2 clearly states that Citizens are State citizens of their State which is a member of the United States therefore, U.S Citizens by virtue of their State citizenship. It establishes the distinction between the Federal government and the States according to Constitutional Scholars and legal precedent. See the Underlined and note the language used. Remember the framers were not lawyers.

Section 4 Clearly defines the Federal Government referred to as The United States and the States :

Section. 1.

Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.

Section. 2.

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.


A Person charged in any State with Treason, Felony, or other Crime, who shall flee from Justice, and be found in another State, shall on Demand of the executive Authority of the State from which he fled, be delivered up, to be removed to the State having Jurisdiction of the Crime.

No Person held to Service or Labour in one State, under the Laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in Consequence of any Law or Regulation therein, be discharged from such Service or Labour, but shall be delivered up on Claim of the Party to whom such Service or Labour may be due.

Section. 3.

New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new State shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or Parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress.

The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States; and nothing in this Constitution shall be so construed as to Prejudice any Claims of the United States, or of any particular State.

Section. 4.

The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened), against domestic Violence.


Now taking this into consideration I ask you go to and read at the links before posting, leave the reactionary rhetoric behind.
Last edited by AlphaOmega on Sat Jan 16, 2010 8:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. -Thomas Jefferson
Copies of all my posts are now kept on file.
AlphaOmega
 
Posts: 238
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2009 2:59 am

Postby greeney2 » Sat Jan 16, 2010 8:14 pm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourteenth ... nstitution

The 14th Amendment is fully ratified. It is not even in a "pending" status, and the ones that are still "pending", are totally Constitutional by ruling of the Supreme Court.
greeney2
 
Posts: 9689
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 11:54 am

Postby AlphaOmega » Sat Jan 16, 2010 8:36 pm

You're repeating yourself Greeney2.

Repeating one self demonstrates in my opinion, (a) that one likes the sound his/her own voice (b) inability to accept a differing view (c) lack of ability to accept that he/or she may be incorrect or ill-informed (d) stubbornness and belligerence (e) attempt by a person to assert authority when that person clearly has none (lack of control) while seeking such authority.

Which of these categories fits you, 1 of them or all of them???

In my opinion you have lost all credibility because of your actions toward me in this topic.
The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. -Thomas Jefferson
Copies of all my posts are now kept on file.
AlphaOmega
 
Posts: 238
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2009 2:59 am

Postby jaydeehess » Sat Jan 16, 2010 10:02 pm

Now taking this into consideration I ask you go to and read at the links before posting, leave the reactionary rhetoric behind.


What rhetoric?
I asked why you would post the links if you wre not going to comment or institute a discussion.

You still have done little other than rail on against greeney rather than actually discuss the topic. In fact you claim you did not originally comment in order to bait greeney into a personal attack on you.
I have refrained from commenting because I had feeling Greeney2 would do what he got caught red handed doing.



It is not neccessary to C&P entire articles in order to comment on the topic.

How then can I even take you seriously?
Math, science, history unraveling the mystery, that all started with a Big Bang.....BANG!!
jaydeehess
 
Posts: 466
Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 12:02 pm

Postby jaydeehess » Sat Jan 16, 2010 10:07 pm

Ok, since AO is reluctant to discuss the merit of the docuement known as the 14th ammendment how about a simple bulleted list by both AO and greeney2 to back the opposing claims that it isn't or is ratified>
Math, science, history unraveling the mystery, that all started with a Big Bang.....BANG!!
jaydeehess
 
Posts: 466
Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 12:02 pm

Postby greeney2 » Sat Jan 16, 2010 10:14 pm

The Record of ratification is right here and it proves the link as being wrong.

The United States Congress proposed the Fourteenth Amendment on June 13, 1866 and on July 9, 1868, three-fourths of the states (28 of 37) had ratified the amendment:[47]

Connecticut (June 25, 1866)
New Hampshire (July 6, 1866)
Tennessee (July 19, 1866)
New Jersey (September 11, 1866)*
Oregon (September 19, 1866)
Vermont (October 30, 1866)
Ohio (January 4, 1867)*
New York (January 10, 1867)
Kansas (January 11, 1867)
Illinois (January 15, 1867)
West Virginia (January 16, 1867)
Michigan (January 16, 1867)
Minnesota (January 16, 1867)
Maine (January 19, 1867)
Nevada (January 22, 1867)
Indiana (January 23, 1867)
Missouri (January 25, 1867)
Rhode Island (February 7, 1867)
Wisconsin (February 7, 1867)
Pennsylvania (February 12, 1867)
Massachusetts (March 20, 1867)
Nebraska (June 15, 1867)
Iowa (March 16, 1868)
Arkansas (April 6, 1868)
Florida (June 9, 1868)
North Carolina (July 4, 1868, after having rejected it on December 14, 1866)
Louisiana (July 9, 1868, after having rejected it on February 6, 1867)
South Carolina (July 9, 1868, after having rejected it on December 20, 1866)
*Ohio passed a resolution that purported to withdraw its ratification on January 15, 1868. The New Jersey legislature also tried to rescind its ratification on February 20, 1868. The New Jersey governor had vetoed his state's withdrawal on March 5, and the legislature overrode the veto on March 24. Accordingly, on July 20, 1868, Secretary of State William H. Seward certified that the amendment had become part of the Constitution if the rescissions were ineffective. The Congress responded on the following day, declaring that the amendment was part of the Constitution and ordering Seward to promulgate the amendment.

Meanwhile, two additional states had ratified the amendment:

Alabama (July 13, 1868, the date the ratification was "approved" by the governor)
Georgia (July 21, 1868, after having rejected it on November 9, 1866)
Thus, on July 28, Seward was able to certify unconditionally that the Amendment was part of the Constitution without having to endorse the Congress's assertion that the withdrawals were ineffective.
There were additional ratifications and rescissions; by 2003, the Amendment had been ratified by every state in the Union as of 1868:[48]Virginia (October 8, 1869, after having rejected it on January 9, 1867)
Mississippi (January 17, 1870)
Texas (February 18, 1870, after having rejected it on October 27, 1866)
Delaware (February 12, 1901, after having rejected it on February 7, 1867)
Maryland (1959)
California (1959)
Oregon (1973, after withdrawing it on October 15, 1868)
Kentucky (1976, after having rejected it on January 8, 1867)
New Jersey (2003, after having rescinded on February 20, 1868)
Ohio (2003, after having rescinded on January 15, 1868)
greeney2
 
Posts: 9689
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 11:54 am

Postby greeney2 » Sat Jan 16, 2010 10:20 pm

In my opinion you have lost all credibility because of your actions toward me in this topic.


You said "you gave no opinion on the subject", that you only posted the links. I retracted all reference to you as per your complaint, and have only responded to the inaccuracy of the links you posted since.

It was never a doubt of ratification by 1868, and by 2003 every state in the Union has ratified the 14th Amendment.
greeney2
 
Posts: 9689
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 11:54 am

Postby sandra » Sat Jan 16, 2010 10:23 pm

You know I realise I have not a whole lot to add to this discussion, because simply I can't even focus on the information that is being provided because of all the rambling CRAP of AO can't you just simply provide information or a point of view or anything without getting way overbearing with personal issues. Wouldn't you be a little less defensive if you were confident in your stance on the subject, my goodness. :? Just ruins the thread.
“Living backwards!” Alice repeated in great
astonishment. “I never heard of such a thing!”
“—but there’s one great advantage in it, that one’s
memory works both ways.”
— Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking-Glass
User avatar
sandra
 
Posts: 3704
Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2009 6:27 pm
Location: Minnesota US

Postby AlphaOmega » Sat Jan 16, 2010 11:49 pm

I believe that the credibility of the links to Princeton University's Law School, The Congressional Records and the other links I have posted are indeed credible. As they refer to historical documentation to further demonstrate the points they are making.

Unfortunately the people who have posted in response to my postings in this thread would rather attack me for not commenting, attempted to manipulate the situation and continue not to read the information provided in the links before posting opposing views.

I have also attempted to demonstrate that certain aspects of the Constitution prior to the 13th, 14th and 16th Amendments were not repealed which may explain the Qualified Legal Opinions given by Princeton, and Judge L.H. Perez and which, is reflected in Congressional Records.

I don't offer opinion on this because I am not a Qualified Lawyer nor am I a Constitutional Lawyer Unlike it seems Greeney2, Sandra, Jaydeehess who also appear to be Practicing Law without a license all the while attacking the messenger.

What is it that you are all sacred of? Is it the messenger or is it that there is a high possibility something may have been exposed makes you think because of the evidence presented that the American People have been LIED to since Lincoln. Hell even Lincoln hated this Amendment and there are documented historical records of this.

Or are you all part of the machine that has been working on the destruction of America by the NWO for since Lincolns time?
The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. -Thomas Jefferson
Copies of all my posts are now kept on file.
AlphaOmega
 
Posts: 238
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2009 2:59 am

PreviousNext

Return to Government and Political Conspiracies

cron
  • View new posts
  • View unanswered posts
  • Who is online
  • In total there are 0 users online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 0 guests (based on users active over the past 10 minutes)
  • Most users ever online was 292 on Mon Apr 23, 2012 3:19 pm
  • Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests