The 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution:  A History
Articles,  Blog

The 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution: A History


There’s a story about a white unionist in the south,
who’s support for newly freed blacks angers his neighbors. They come over one night and basically tell him to shut up. When he refuses they take him outside, tie him to a
tree and horsewhip him and they tell him That if they have to come back they’re gonna
hang him from that same tree. But the man had nowhere to turn because the south at
this time was a place of lawless tyranny. The 14th amendment was designed to stamp out that tyranny By requiring government officials to respect the basic civil rights of all Americans. The period following the civil war was marked
by shocking abuses of individual rights And by a constitutional amendment, the 14th amendment, designed to halt those abuses. The seeds of those events were contained in our
founding documents, including the Declaration of Independence. The declaration of independence was a promise of limited government Based on individual rights and the ideals of the enlightenment. And the story of the American Consitution and especially the 14th amendment Is really the story of our trying to live up to that promise. Of course, the lofty ideals in the Declaration of
Independence and the Constitution cannot be reconciled With the abomination of slavery. The tacit approval of which set
us on a path to disaster from day one. The constitution’s failure to resolve the question of slavery gave
rise to a furious national debate. Some people, like senator John Calhoun, argued that the Constitution’s references to slavery amounted to a tacit endorsement. Others, like the radical legal scholar, Lysander Spooner, argued exactly the opposite That the Constitution presumed all men were free making slavery impossible. So in public, there were two sides: The
anti-slavery camp. arguing that the Constitution Presupposed that people were free and that this was totally
irreconcilable with the idea of slavery. And you had the pro-slavery camp. arguing almost exactly the opposite Unfortunately, in the courts, the pro-slavery side won
an almost unbroken series of victories. For example, anti-slavery activists had argued that the
bill of rights automatically bound the states But the supreme court rejected that position in
a case called Baron v Baltimore. Holding that the bill of rights only affected the federal government. Later on in a case called Dred Scott v Sanford
the court in an opinion by Chief Justice Roger Taney, not only rejected the anti-slavery position
that the privileges and immunities clause in Article 4 protected individual rights but actually went so far
as to hold that the black man had no rights, that “The white man was bound to respect.” Over the course of the debates about slavery in America
what you really see is a movement That started out as an anti-slavery movement, really
changed into a movement much more Radical and much more broadly devoted to the
protection of natural rights ranging from Free speech to the right to control one’s own labor.
Part of that is due to the influence of Intellectuals, like Lysander Spooner, or Joel Tiffany but part of
that is just a reaction to the Horrible abuses of natural rights that abolitionists saw in the pre-war south and Immediately after the civil war. In the aftermath of
the civil war newly freed blacks Were systematically terrorized, disarmed and even lynched for asserting their right to equality and individual liberty. The stories of violence perpetrated against newly freed blacks are truly horrifying. For example, Robert Church, a black entrepreneur in Memphis Tennessee Actually one of the first major black entrepreneurs anywhere in the reconstruction south Owned a saloon and several other businesses around Memphis. He was wildly successful He was beloved by the community and in
1866 an angry mob of white people, Largely led by members of the local police force, broke into his saloon, Dragged him into the street, shot him and
left him for dead, all because He was in a business they thought a
black man shouldn’t be in. By the time congress convened in 1866 anti-slavery republicans dominated both houses Led by men, like John Bingham in the
house, along with senators Charles Sumner and and Jacob Howard radical republicans enjoyed complete control of congress They have the power to amend the constitution and
they are determined to use it. They were faced with an unending series of abuses in the reconstruction south State and local governments had responded to the
new 13th amendment ban on slavery By trying to deprive newly freed slaves and
their white supporters of any needful freedom Especially economic freedom. Economic liberty, the right to pursue a livelihood of your
own choosing and to keep the money you Earn was the opposite of slavery and the real opportunity for freed slaves To lead a free life. The pro slavery forces knew this,
so in the south freed slaves weren’t just banned From pursuing particular occupations but in some places it
was actually illegal for black people To leave their employer’s property without written permission. In others, breaking a labor contract was punished by
whipping. The 14th amendment was Supposed to stop rights violations like these. One of the rights most frequently mentioned in
connection with the 14th amendment was The right to keep and bear arms. Congress was
well aware of the fact that newly freed Blacks and White Union soldiers were being systematically disarmed throughout the south In order to subjugate and terrorize them. For
example, Congress heard testimony about a Town in Kentucky where the town Marshal was “Very prompt
to take arms away from all of the returning black soldiers and to shoot them whenever the opportunity arose.” The 14th amendment was proposed in response to this wholesale violation Of civil rights as embodied, for example, in the notorious black codes. The architect of the 14th amendment, John Bingham, was
a learned and well respected lawyer from Ohio. Bingham actually appears to have been one of the
few members of Congress who understood That by virtue of the supreme court’s decision in Barron v Baltimore, The bill of rights did not apply directly against the states. In fact, Bingham had to bring a copy of Baron onto the floor
of the house to prove that the bill of rights Had no affect against the states. John Bingham
believed there was a hole in the Original constitution, which was that it didn’t give the
federal government the power to protect individual rights from interference by the states. The fourteenth amendment was Bingham’s effort to fix that. The 14th amendment protects three distinct interests: due process, equal protection, and the privileges or immunities, Meaning rights, of United States Citizens. Of those three, privileges or immunities Are, by far, the most important because that clause protects individual rights from Government Infringement. In 1872, the Supreme Court had its first opportunity
to interpret the privileges or immunities clause. In a case called Slaughterhouse. Handed down in 1873, the Slaughterhouse cases Essentially read the privileges or immunities clause right out of the 14th amendment In the Slaughterhouse cases justice Samuel Miller, writing for
a bear majority of the court Held that the privileges or immunities clause protected only
a limited and relatively trivial set Of, so called, rights of national citizenship, such as
the right to access navigable waterways And federal sub treasuries and to invoke the protection of the
federal government when on the high seas. This was an utterly absurd reading of the privileges or immunities clause. No one thinks we fought a civil war and amended the constitution Because someone, somewhere had difficulty accessing a sub treasury And no one thinks that today. There is virtually unanimous agreement Among constitutional scholars that the Slaughterhouse majority’s interpretation Of the privileges or immunities clause is completely indefensible. Taking their cue from the supreme court’s refusal
to enforce the 14th amendment consistent With its text, purpose and history the states
responded by expanding the existing black Codes into the formal caste system of Jim Crowe.
Blacks and Whites alike were subject to a Host of regulations designed to prevent newly freed
blacks, or Freedmen as they were Called, from becoming economically self sufficient members of society. This unrelenting Assault on liberty finally forced the supreme court
to reconsider its understanding of the 14th amendment. Having effectively eliminated the privileges or immunities clause as a Meaningful part of the constitution the court eventually began protecting individual rights Through a doctrine called substantive due process. That
has a historical pedigree that dates Back to the Magna Carta, that the supreme court’s use
of substantive due process to do a job For which the privileges or immunities clause was
designed has resulted in a patchwork And incomplete juries-prudence of liberty. Some rights the 14th amendment was supposed To protect, like freedom of speech, ended up
protected anyway, but others like economic Liberty, or the right to own a gun
just got ignored and waived away. On any fair reading there is not the slightest
doubt that the 14th amendment protects an Individual right to own a gun for self defense. So
why did it take the supreme court nearly 150 years to recognize that right and then by a
margin of only one vote? The second Amendment says, “The right of the people to keep and
bare arms shall not be infringed.” Despite that clear language, it took a carefully planned public interest lawsuit, which I Helped design and litigate, District of Columbia v
Heller, to finally persuade the Supreme Court To interpret the second amendment as protecting an
individual right to own a gun. But because the District of Columbia is a federal
jurisdiction, to which the bill of rights Applies directly, Heller left open the question of
whether the 14th amendment protects the Right to own a gun from interference by state and
local officials and if so, how? That was the question the supreme court took up two
years later in McDonald v City of Chicago. Faced with this question in McDonald the supreme court split into three caps. Four of the justices wanted to use the traditional substantive due process method To find that the right to keep and bare
arms was fundamental and should therefore Be applied against the states. Another group of four
justices wanted to use substantive due process To say that the right to keep and bear arms
was not fundamental and therefore shouldn’t apply. The deciding fifth vote fell to justice, Clarence Thomas. Justice Thomas makes such a powerful case for the
privileges or immunities clause in his McDonald concurrence that none of the other justices
in the plurality or the descent challenge his reading of the relevant history or his conclusion
that the right to own a gun is a privilege or immunity of American citizenship. The 14th amendment, and especially the privileges or immunities clause was a really Radical change to the constitution. It was supposed
to give the federal government and Especially the federal courts, the power to protect rights that had been historically Trampled by state and local governments. One of these
fundamental rights was the right to Earn an honest living, but for its entire existence
the privileges or immunities clause has Been a dead letter. McDonald starts to change that. In the wake of McDonald, the privileges or immunities
clause is relevant, is alive in ways It simply hasn’t been since it was adopted. And
in coming years as law students sit down To read the different opinions of McDonald, it’s going
to become clear that only one of Those opinions really tries to grapple with
the constitutional history, really tries to grapple with the role the 14th amendment plays
in our constitutional structure and that’s going to make an enormous difference. The 14th amendment was a promise. It was a promise
to the people of this country of Limited government and respect for individual rights.
But that promise was broken almost Immediately by the supreme court’s redaction of the privileges or immunities clause from The fourteenth amendment. The institute for Justice has
been working for twenty years to Restore the privileges or immunities clause, to restore
the concept of individual liberty to Its proper place in the constitution and its proper place in our society.

100 Comments

  • Kapt Blasto

    NatDebt is 16 Trillion and Climbing, with 1.5 Trillion held by the FEDRSV, another 4~5 Trillion Held "Intergovernmentally" (Social Security and Medicare) and the rest, the 10-11 Trillion held by OUR CITIZENS and Corporations, and the rest of the World.

    All supposedly SIT and WAIT for GOVERNMENT to "PAY DOWN" the National Debt…ad infinitum, ad absurdum, ad nauseum…

    and they keep buying and buying…and keep trying to legally and illegally evade the increasing TAXATION.

    (continued..)

  • Kapt Blasto

    I'm going to have to make a damn video talking about this…I really do. I'm kinda futzing around, because I don't REALLY want to get my face on there and somehow look stupid. That's why I put my bear, or my thumb on the lens, as it's better for me…or, I just write it!

    Besides, I think my stuffed bear is more photogenic than I am. At least he can sit still long enough, and he doesn't APPEAR nervous.

    I don't know….

  • lovelyfaye arayata

    Hey there! Have you ever heard about the "Phantom Cash System"? I found it on Google Search and read lots of impressive stuff about it. Some of my friend also highly recommend me to try it

  • waypasthadenough

    Slavery was the excuse, installed later, for that war, like dubya and the republicrats talked about 'democracy' when they sent troops to Iraq. The tyrant lincoln wanted to war to enforce the Morrill Tariff.

    Understand this if you understand nothing else: They consider us to be livestock.
    We need to focus on taking our country and governments back so we can figure out who to hang.

    Don’t understand? Follow my links. Read the quotes page first.

  • waypasthadenough

    They had been abused for decades and had many reasons for withdrawing. Only statist shit would claim states don't have the right to secede.

    While we deplore slavery of all kinds and look with a jaundiced eye at the southern aristocracy, most of those who fought for independence weren't rich and didn't own slaves while many yankees owned slaves and kept them till the end. This is modern hypocrisy.

    After the war the black slaves were elevated into a new form of slavery, and we, lowered.

  • Yang Yin

    What is the original document of The Constitution that was created in 1776? Were there only 10 Amendments which represents The Bill of Rights? Anyone know?

  • Yang Yin

    So what does the original document say when it was created. Do you know or is there a link that shows any evidence? If not then the closest document to 1776 is The Bill of Rights?

  • Amar Jit Singh

    but certainly not of military style, at least not so common, psychos can defend themself with pepper spray.

  • Jesse Gibbons

    Look up usconstitution[dot]net. The United States did not officially have an independent government until 1778. That government was set up by the Articles of Confederation, and was not even powerful enough to sustain itself. The constitution we have today was not written and passed until 1787, 9 years later. The Bill of Rights had 10 amendments that were officially ratified in 1791.

  • Jesse Gibbons

    "…the right of the PEOPLE to KEEP and BARE arms SHALL NOT be infringed."
    Talk about "not in context". It has been interpreted as two different clauses – one declaring the right of the states to have a militia, the other stating people have a right to own weapons including guns to protect themselves.

  • October31st1517

    And? How are your rights being infringed. You are protected under the constitution like every other American.

  • AkiraDaemon

    this is bull shit the 14 amendment is what makes us all government slaves.
    by declaring us as property of the government. common law protects people from being assaulted or robed.

  • AkiraDaemon

    its the people that make the state or any government. and its the people that have the rights which the government has no authority to take away.

  • Andrew Jackson

    No you're exactly right on. Making every united states citizen an acount, and a subjecting them to "public policy". No american was subject to this pre-1861. Every united states citizen is now no longer an american with constitutional rights, but is now, through citizenship, a corporate citizen. These lawyers who push the idea of freeing slaves, actually work for the Crown Temple, who oversee all bar- asociations in the world, and own the United states corporation.

  • Andrew Jackson

    Yes ! and Jimmy Carter sold all United States birth certificates to the IMF as collateral. This makes you property, and holds you responsible for the federal debt, and you have no say in the spending. It's similar to "taxation without representation". Where the fuck are the Green mountain Boys?

  • Andrew Jackson

    No there is a difference between a United States citizen and an American. The American has a constitution, but the United states citizen only has privileges. If your a United States citizen, then at this moment in time you have the privilege to bear arms not a right! United states citizens are not Americans legally. A united states citizen didn't have a right to a trial by jury until 1967.

  • Andrew Jackson

    "The current constitution"? This all changed in the forties or did I miss something? A U.S. citizen is federal property, am I wrong? I don't think so. Prove it. Show me. We don't have a constitution. We have "TheConstitution". Still a separate contract.

  • Imjetta Nolastnamegiven

    Great video; please leave off the music next time, it's very hard for the hard of hearing to hear the words clearly. And the captions that Youtube has are not good.

  • David Anderson

    The 14th Amendment was created to enslave anyone born in the U.S.. This is the only Country in the World that requires you to be a Citizen. It is not possible to leave this Country without a Passport yet you have to agree to Citizenship in order to get one. This is not freedom this is servitude.

  • Laren P

    14th was never constitutionally ratified. Fuck it! If you can't leave the union how can you be kicked out of it and be required to ratify an amendment. where in the constitution does it say that?

  • tarstarkusz

    Did these people read the McDonald decision? It was the due process clause that overturned the Chicago gun ban and the slaughterhouse decision remains. I heard the oral arguments and the lawyer was interrupted a few minutes into his speech about the privileges and immunities clause and I also listened to the conclusion in which Justice Scallia said they weren't overturning or reconsidering the slaughterhouse cases.

  • Indiana Joe

    There are no 14th Amendment US citizens today.  They have all died, as they were the freed slaves, who had no rights and no protection.  Those slaves became 'subject to the jurisdiction thereof' in exchange for some privileges, which they otherwise would not have.  If you are within one of the several states, you are NOT 'subject to the jurisdiction thereof' as in the 14th amendment, and are NOT a US citizen!

  • lBaerdeLouisYAna

    Carpetbaggers. The pro-slavery camp won in courts because it was NOT debatable in the U.S. Constitution.  Without the slavery clause in the Constitution, there would have been no United States of America.  Newly freed blacks were not targeted by the KKK, but all Republicans were hung.  Wether it be carpetbaggers (white) or freed slaves.  What business did Southerners think a black man couldn't be in?  There were free men of color before the Civil War who owned and traded slaves with other WHITE plantation owners.  Due process, equal protection, and privileges and immunities are already stated in the United States Constitution.  So which is legal and which is illegal, the 13th or 14th amendment.  If the Southern Democrats were allowed to vote on the 13th amendment and after rejecting the 14th amendment, were told that they were not yet part of the Union and would not be until Northern Republicans seen fit, which amendment is legal?

  • MadMetalManiac74

    Then why do we still have identification with our slave names. Birth certificates. Income and land taxes. Inheritance taxes. Ect ect ect. You seem to be missing the act of 1871. This is not a country. FACT! It hasn't been since 1871 and unless you were born before 1871 you are a slave. In the most literal sense. Infact after the act of 1871, when a new form of gov was created for dc under maritime law after begging The Rothchilds for money, legally America became a corporation!!! Under maritime law you are what's called a citizen. A product not a person. DC is the only thing legally considered "America" and the 50 states are only franchises of DC which is a jurisdiction of Britain. FACT! Who ownes all major banks including the fed 😀 you are more enslaved today than ever!!!

  • MadMetalManiac74

    This video is completely bs and the comment section proves it. People don't buy this garbage!!! The facts are all you need and it's there. Word for word. The 14th is a fraud. It didn't end slavery it created millions more!!!

  • Tom Dockery

    The last two nights has shown why this Amendment must be repealed-with all deliberate speed.Mother Nature will always defeat motherfucker.

  • Hose Q

    @InstituteForJustice,
    “Yet, of the cases in this Court in which the Fourteenth Amendment was applied during the first fifty years after its adoption, less than one-half of 1 per cent invoked it in protection of the negro race, and more than 50 percent asked that its benefits be extended to corporations.” ~ Justice Hugo Black, Connecticut General Life Ins. Co. v. Johnson, 303 U.S. 77 [1938]

    Is there any MORE disinfo and DECEPTION you want to pass on to the world??

  • MI HO

    The Constitution was assaulted by the passing of this 14th,, We are allowing the government to bypass, omit , deny  and ignore  the constitution and  if we don't speak out , it is the same  as we are permitting the actions  or consenting to their anti-Constitutional a actions.  As we are the  witnesses to this current administration and the  constant  anti American  Constitutional assaults they so joyfully practice, we too will find ourselves  in a very sad and weak shape.  Don't be fooled again , LOVE AMERICA , it has been good to you and me, Don't give it to the  elite  politicians that  only use  teir actions to self  enrich ·▓ † ▓

  • Tom Dockery

    The beat goes on.How many shot'dead cops are enough for Holder and his Indonesian spy boss?Jack Nicholson would support repealing this Amendment as these people can't handle freedom.

  • kevlarunderware

    The 14th amendment created dual citizenship. Citizen of your country (State) citizen of the United states Federal citizen .Subject to the jurisdiction . A king has Subjects not a free individual .

  • Turkish Delight

    This is very interesting as an Australian student. Why are people in the comment section saying the 14th amendment doesn't exist?

  • Bud Johnson

    There are hundreds of groups and
    efforts to get the American people organized to restore our
    Constitution and our natural rights. I am asking members of all these
    fracture groups to come together in one place where ideas and actions
    can be implemented in a unified effort to restore our Republic form
    of Government Come join the effort and have your voice heard  Please share this message.

    https://plus.google.com/communities/102757145006659462691

  • erroneus

    Isn't it interesting that this history is essentially an emotive glossing-over of what really happened and makes no mention of the numerous unethical and illegal means by which the 14th amendment was declared as ratified.

  • DramaticHistory

    Wow… look at all the racism, nativism, and conspiracy in this section. It's almost like folks didn't watch the video and assume that the 14th Amendment was written in spite of their convictions, not predating it by 150 years.

    This was a pretty good overview of the impact of the 14th Amendment. I would point out that there are other videos that discuss the history of ratification as well as several historical sources that can offer more insight on the process of Reconstruction, which is divisive.

  • CJ Kirk

    In what language is a privilege the same thing as a right? A privilege is something that can be taken away..

    And why does he think he knows the intentions of the creators of the 14th amendment better than the supreme court in the Slaughterhouse case? Sounds like revisionist history to me..

  • MrAliBey

    4:43 There's no such thing as a "Freed Slave". One is either Enslaved or he is a Free Man. It is oxymoronic, disingenuous and foolish for people to continue to perpetuate that psychological nonsense.

  • Dro Pleckk

    Remember what BAR stands for when referencing lawyers – BRITISH ACCREDIDATION REGISTRY! And you thought we were no longer under British rule. Anyway – I will keep my G-D GIVEN RIGHTS! YOU can keep you granted privileges. I suggest that all here research what is known as THE RED AMENDMENT!

  • Cj R

    If the second amendment guarantees a right to bear arms (and to buy them, presumably), and the fourteenth amendment says that "all persons born…in the United States are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside…no state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the rights…of citizens of the United States…", isn't it technically unconstitutional for there to be an age requirement for purchasing a gun? If someone under 21 can't purchase a handgun and someone under 18 can't purchase a long gun, aren't their rights as citizens of the United States being abridged? Regardless of what the
    courts have said, I believe that the right to bear arms (just like the right to free speech) applies to all citizens, regardless of age.

  • Sean Walsh

    The 14 Amendment is very helpful to so how we are all equal and if you don't agree with this you might as well be a Mexican because you don't deserve to be in this wonderful country.

  • Easyrider Pappy

    I have news for these morons . The Right Of The PEOPLE to KEEP and bare Arm is a RIGHT and not a privilege .

  • Drake Doragon

    The Forefathers were rich elite slave owners, who were less about freedom and more about who gets control. Don't buy the BS.

  • Thomas Maddux

    2 National governments?
    "The idea prevails with some, indeed it has found expression in arguments at the bar, that we have in this country substantially two national governments; one to be maintained under the Constitution, with all of the restrictions; the other to be maintained by the Congress outside and independently of that instrument, by exercising such powers as other nations of the earth are accustomed to…I take leave to say that, if the principles thus announced should ever receive the sanction of a majority of this court, a radical and mischievous change in our system of government will result. We will, in that event, pass from the era of constitutional liberty, guarded and protected by a written constitution into an era legislative absolutism…It will be an evil day for American liberty if the theory of government outside the Supreme law of the land finds lodgment in our Constitutional jurisprudence. No higher duty rests upon this court than to exert its full authority to prevent all violation of the principles of the Constitution." Downes v. Bidwell, 182 U.S. 244

    The never ratified 14th article(notice how careful they are to say "ADDED" in the statement under the video) creates a new federal citizen, this new federal citizen has civil rights(government privileges) and NOT God given rights(no government necessary) per our founding document: "the laws of nature and of natures God entitle them" July 1776.

    For a precise definition on this new federal citizen, use Black's Law 6th edition under "Fourteenth Amendment" page 657.
    (creates or recognizes for the first time a "citizenship of the United States'', as distinct from that of the States) Exact. This is a new legal citizen that is the EXACT opposite of our founding and NEVER approved, which begins a new unlimited government.

    This federal aka national citizen was discussed in the constitutional convention of 1787 and turned down due to the central government having supremacy over these citizens. This is exactly what we are seeing today. And the $20.5 Trillion debt shoves it right in our face.

    The never ratified 14th article aka a "bill of attainder" is a 100% scam. Understand it, denounce it's validity.
    Thomas Maddux
    Texas National
    (not a federal citizen aka a never ratified 14th amendment legal citizen)

  • dave roy

    Lipstick on a pig.
    @10:20 DC is a federal district where bill of rights applies "directly".
    civil war dissolved the country, killing Lincoln allowed coup d'état, organic act 1871 created US Inc. and Satanic DC, land donated by Virginia and Maryland (virgin Mary), primary cause of war of 1812 was proposed 13th amendment (titles and nobility act) not central bank charter, current 13th amendment introduced first legal basis for slavery (voluntary servitude now legal and slavery as punishment if convicted by court), US corp. has largest prison population per capita in the world by far…now you know why.

  • R.i.p. to the lies R.E.A

    So what you are saying is America is the first paper pushes.. over 500 treaties broken it was only paper. Every time the Native Americans go to court they are reminded. You're not the Savages we conquered. And every time the so-called African American goes to court you're not Native American. So no one takes the advice of America. Imagine your neighbor comes into your house. Turn you and your family and to slaves. Kill the mother and the father. Until the children you are from Africa. Forget about the Colossal heads in Southern America. Black lives matter fuck you. Fighting for gay rights. When you should have been fighting for the family

  • PaulRevere RidesAgain

    Of course the entire 'Constitution' was written to protect 'citizens' of this nation, not invaders, not 'slaves' and it applied to the 'federal' government not the individual States. We should have done what Lincoln proposed and sent the 'slaves' back 'home'. We also should have never allowed Jewish ship owners to create a new market in this nation called 'slavery'…and, of course the Civil war was like all other wars, over power and money, not slavery. Anyone arguing different is either ignorant or has an agenda, and that's a fact.

  • Nathaniel Wilson

    the 2nd amendment does not actually guarantee the individual right but the right of a regulated militia.

  • Jamal Yusuf Ali Bey

    The greatest hoax ever played upon the British subjects and pheasants of the British Colonies, was the"Treaty of Paris, which I'm almost certain no one here has ever read! It's ends the revolutionary war, and allows for the British 👑 to maintain it's dominance over the rag tag rebellious theives as called by the king of Britain. The Republic that was born out of the attempt at sovereignty was actualized but as Benjamin Franklin said to an old lady in the streets, when she asked him following the final ratification of the Constitution, "What did we get"? And he answered her saying " A free Republic if we can keep it"! The government before the new one…i.e. articles of confederation/constitution was drafted into the current constitution absent the Northwest Ordinances that banned slavery outright. The Caucasian, European descendant's that broke away from the former government in confederation with all nation's already here in the Americas especially the Aboriginal and Indigenous people's, had their rights under the former constitutional confederation, something racist revistionist like to hide and conceal from the true historical narrative, which is why the famous former fox news anchor Glen Beck was fired, for revealing this hidden historical record due to it's extremely toxic damage. There were traitors from among the European founding fathers of the commercial Admiralty contract with the 👑 that sold out the others. That's why there's a "British Accredited Registrar" over the courts, Nationwide. The supreme Court is compromise d between the internal secret wars, Republic v Democracy orders.

  • Jamal Yusuf Ali Bey

    The original Aboriginal and Indigenous people's of the Americas are not "Naturalized Citizen's" which is the second teir of political status of Citizenship, rather we are Treaty Nationals, which is higher in that we preexisted all Foreigner's by tens of thousands of years, in self government rule, no king's, feudalism, pheasants or paupers. Webster's Dictionary 1828 edition and later as well defined the definition of American as " One of the Aboriginal and Indigenous copper colored nation's found in the Americas by the Europeans"!!! That is the original definition of "American" and after the overthrow, rape, destruction, mass murdering, genocide and land theft, that definition was applied to the descendants of the earliest war criminals and Human Rights violators. The whole world knows this historical record and facts.

  • Fatimoh Jinadu

    Tribes, ethnicity, nationality, citizens, nativity, desident, resident, emigrant, immigrant, states status are not one in the same. No one is purely white skinned nor dark black skinned. Its all social construct. Citizen is a contract from whom ever started it. The indigenious people anywhere around the globe will rebel citizenship status. Amazonian have no clue of citizenship unless we want to label them Brazillian citizen etc. Crusader, colonisers, Invadors and settlers in todays America for word sake were not citizens neither were the indigenious. Kunta kunte…i am who i am not Tobi.for movie entertainment sake; Was neither a citizen. The 1st five president of United snake were neither US citizens inc. Be your natural self either tribe or nationality see fit. Citizenship is not free. Who was the first person to issue a bachelor degree and 1st person awarded it. Do the issuer have BS? Same to 14 th amendment citizenship. May be the acclaim king and is clan power enforced this act via exploration in their new world not to the natives its always their world million of years back.

  • frank masters

    Let me explain it to all of you illegal shitbags and lunatic liberals. The fourteenth amendment was written to protect Africans who were brought to the U.S. against their will and then sold into indentured servitude. This amendment was for blacks brought here against their will, and since there are not any slaves alive today this amendment is void. If you truly knew how to read and understand a crafted sentence, you would know this amendment does not grant citizenship to the children of immigrants whom come here and shit them out.

  • J Bradford

    Pure hogwash. No truth in this video at all. The South was more peaceful that the North and their Jim Crow laws. Check out Massachusetts racism.

    1641 Massachusetts Body of Liberties recognizes slavery for blacks, Native Americans, or mulattos.
    1773 -1778 Boston, Massachusetts – Petitions to the Legislature, signed by Prince Hall, a self-educated spiritual leader, and other free blacks, remind the Legislature that they seek the same rights and freedoms from Britain as their white peers.
    1780 Boston, Massachusetts – Paul Cuffee of Westport refuses to pay taxes in protest against the state constitution's exclusion of blacks and Native Americans from voting. Cuffee also protests school discrimination and builds an interracial Quaker school.
    1787 Boston, Massachusetts – Prince Hall petitions the Boston school committee for a separate school for "colored" children.
    1816 Boston, Massachusetts – The American Colonization Society is formed to encourage the emigration of free blacks from the US to West Africa.
    1840 Boston, Massachusetts – Eunice Ross is found "amply qualified" to attend the High School in Boston, Massachusetts, but is denied because of her color.
    Pre Civil War segregation was on ALL railroad cars throughout the North.
    1805 Boston, Massachusetts – five year old black Sarah Roberts sues Boston, so she can attend an all white school.
    1976 Boston, Massachusetts – "The Soiling of Old Glory" was taken on April 5, 1976, during the Boston busing desegregation protests.
    64 years after the decision in Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas the case is still only referred as Brown v. Board of Education. The school segregation case was in Topeka, Kansas folks, and no where near the SOUTH.

    And this is just the beginning.

  • J Bradford

    The promise of the 14th Amendment is a promise of "limited government." Are you insane? The 14th Amendment expanded government to unlimited realms. How's those anchor babies and sanctuary cities working out for you?

  • RKBA

    The thing about the 14th Amendment, along with a couple of others "ratified" following the War for Southern Independence, is that it was "ratified" at the point of a gun under the Laws of Conquest/War. If I force you, at gunpoint, to sign a contract, is that a valid and enforceable contract? I'm NOT arguing the pros and cons of the purpose of the amendment! Just HOW it was "ratified".

  • Kenneth Tickle

    How is it possible they never mention the Democrat party in there voting records toward slavery? What about the policy’s of Andrew Jackson and later Woodrow Wilson? And what party also put Jim Crowe laws into play! Hint not the Republicans! This documentary is flawed,because without the telling of which voting block created the raciest laws.For when the ones responsible are not called out or not mentioned then You are not telling the whole story!

  • apps account

    I'm an optimist. I believe the full potential of the 14th Amendment to protect individual rights will be realize, and not just abused to rationalize illegality.

  • CKB

    USA CONSTITUTION 14 AMENDMENT:
    all persons born or naturalized in the unite states, and subjected to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the unites states and the state wherein they reside.
    OR, READING BETWEEN THE LINES:
    all persons born or naturalized in the united states, and subject to their natural mother thereof, are subject of their mother and the states of which she resides.

  • jenine york

    14th Amendment gave Aboriginal people who were no longer slaves the right to be excepted as citizens and eligible to receive the benefits of citizenship. 14th Amendment was not written for foreigners to misuse use immigration policies of the United States of America. We must understand when white Europeans arrived on this land Aboriginal people were given the name Indian they are the ancestors of the so-called African Americans people. Queen Callifia –Google search want you to believe she was a fictional character but she was a real Queen living on land in California. The person who could explain Aboriginal people better than I can is Dane Calloway YouTube channel. 14th Amendment was written for Aboriginal people who were no longer slaves. If immigration policies are not fixed people all over the world will continue to exploit the 14th Amendment. Mexicans are not Aboriginal or black they are OTHER. They are the result of rape white people of French and Spain forced rape on Aboriginal people. Most History has been erased and twisted thank God for those who do their research explaining American History. Check out Dane Calloway YouTube channel

  • One Tzikin House of Douglass

    What a joke…. What a scam…
    Correct your status.. from slave to self governed… Only u can…. Vigilantibus Et Non Dormientibus Jura Subveniunt

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *