As explained by Jon Roland, of the Constitution
Society, the language of the Fourteenth Amendment was "intended by the
framers of the Fourteenth to extend the jurisdiction and protection of
federal courts to all rights recognized by the Constitution and Bill
of Rights against actions by state government."
http://www.constitution.org/col/intent_14th.htm
To learn the Fourteenth Amendment's "original intent," and what it
potentially means to you, then read the concurring opinions of Justice
BRADLEY, SWAYNE and FIELD in Bartemeyer v. Iowa (1873):
"By that portion of the fourteenth amendment by which no State may
make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges and
immunities of citizens of the United States, or take life, liberty,
or property, without due process of law, it has now become the
fundamental law of this country that life, liberty, and property
(which include 'the pursuit of happiness') are sacred rights, which
the Constitution of the United States guarantees to its
humblest citizen against oppressive legislation,
whether national or local, so that he cannot be deprived of them
without due process of law. ...
"Before this amendment and the thirteenth amendment were adopted,
the States had supreme authority over all these matters, and the
National government, except in a few particulars, could afford no
protection to the individual against arbitrary and oppressive
legislation. After the civil war had closed, the same authority was
asserted, and, in the States recently in insurrection, was exercised
to the
oppression of
the freedmen; and towards
citizens of the
North seeking residence there,
or citizens resident there who had maintained their
loyalty during the war for nationality, a
feeling of jealousy and dislike existed which could not fail soon to
fined expression in discriminating and hostile legislation. It was
to prevent the possibility of such legislation in future, and its
enforcement where already adopted, that the fourteenth amendment was
directed. It grew out of the feeling that a union which had been
maintained by such costly sacrifices was, after all, worthless if a
citizen could not be protected in all his fundamental rights
everywhere- North and South, East and West-throughout the limits of
the Republic.
The [fourteenth] amendment was
not, as held in the
opinion of the majority [in the Slaughter-House Cases],
primarily intended to confer citizenship
on the negro race.
It had a much broader purpose; it was intended
to justify legislation [i.e., now codified as 42 USC sections 1983,
1985, 1986] , extending the protection of the National government
over the common rights of
all citizens of the United States, and
thus obviate objections to the legislation [i.e., the Civil Rights
Act of 1866, and the Freemen's Bureau Act] adopted for the
protection of the emancipated race. It was intended to make it
possible for
all persons, which
necessarily included those of every race and color,
to live in peace and security wherever the jurisdiction of the
nation reached. It, therefore,
recognized,
if it did not create,
a National citizenship,
and made all
persons citizens except those who preferred to remain under the
protection of a foreign government; and
declared that their privileges and immunities, which embrace the
fundamental rights belonging to citizens of all free governments,
should not be abridged by any State. This
National citizenship
[85 U.S. 129, 141] is primary, and not
secondary. It clothes its possessor, or would do so if not shorn of
its efficiency by construction, with the right, when his privileges
and immunities are invaded by partial and discriminating
legislation, to appeal from his State to his Nation, and gives him
the assurance that, for his protection, he can invoke the whole
power of the government."
That profound declaration of the purposes of the Fourteenth
Amendment is a correct and contemporaneous statement of the
"original intent" of the First Section of the Fourteenth Amendment
to the Constitution of the United States, and that view was
correctly and fully embraced by the entire Supreme Court of the
United States (up until the present, Rehnquist, Supreme Court).
See, cases collected in "Law" (Part 1) and the recently created
Doctrine of Unauthorized Deprivation (Part 2) at
www.billstclair.com/ferran
As the Justices said, the Fourteenth Amendment "was intended to
justify legislation [i.e., now codified as 42 USC sections 1983, 1985,
1986], extending the protection of the National government over the
common rights of
all citizens of the United States,
and thus obviate objections to the legislation adopted for the
protection of the emancipated race." The legislation effecting the
purpose referred to, enacted by Congress (in 1871) to extend the
"protection of the National government over the common rights of
all citizens of the United States," was
titled "An
Act to Enforce the
Provisions of the Fourteenth Amendment" approved April 20, 1871 (now
codified in 42 USC sections 1983, 1985, 1986):
42 U.S.C.
Section 1983. Civil action for
deprivation of rights:
"Every person who, under color of any
statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State
or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to
be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person
within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any
rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution
and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at
law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress."
Title 42, United States Code, Sec. 1983 (History: R.S. Sec.
1979 derived from act Apr. 20, 1871, ch. 22, Sec. 1, 17 Stat. 13.
"An Act to Enforce the Provisions of the Fourteenth Amendment." |
42 U.S.C.
Section 1985. Conspiracy to
interfere with civil rights:
- (2) If two or more persons in any State or Territory ...
conspire for the purpose of impeding, hindering, obstructing,
or defeating, in any manner, the due course of justice in any
State or Territory, with intent to deny to any
citizen the equal protection of the laws, or to
injure him or his property for lawfully enforcing, or
attempting to enforce, the right of any person,
or class of persons, to the equal protection of the laws;
- (3) [or] If two or more persons in any State or Territory
conspire ... for the purpose of depriving, either directly or
indirectly, any person or class of persons of the
equal protection of the laws, or of equal
privileges and immunities under the laws; or for the purpose
of preventing or hindering the constituted authorities of any
State or Territory from giving or securing to all persons
within such State or Territory the equal protection of the
laws; or if two or more persons conspire to prevent by force,
intimidation, or threat, any citizen who is lawfully entitled
to vote, from giving his support or advocacy in a legal
manner, toward or in favor of the election of any lawfully
qualified person as an elector for President or Vice
President, or as a Member of Congress of the United States; or
to injure any citizen in person or property on account of such
support or advocacy;
-
- in any case of conspiracy set forth in this section, if
one or more persons engaged therein do, or cause to be done,
any act in furtherance of the object of such conspiracy,
whereby another is injured in his person or property, or
deprived of having and exercising any right or privilege of a
citizen of the United States, the party so injured
or deprived may have an action for the recovery of damages
occasioned by such injury or deprivation, against any one or
more of the conspirators.
Title 42, United States Code, Sec. 1985. [History: R.S. Sec.
1980 derived from acts July 31, 1861, ch. 33, 12 Stat. 284; Apr.
20, 1871, ch. 22, Sec. 2, 17 Stat. 13 "An Act to Enforce the
Provisions of the Fourteenth Amendment." Section was formerly
classified to section 47 of Title 8, Aliens and Nationality.] |
This statute, enacted to aid in "'the preservation of human
liberty and human rights'" Owen v. City of Independence, 445 US
622, 636 (1980), reflects a congressional judgment that a
"damages remedy against the offending party is a vital component
of any scheme for vindicating cherished constitutional
guarantees." As remedial legislation, [the Act to Enforce the
Provisions of the Fourteenth Amendment] is to be construed
generously to further its primary purpose.
Gomez v. Toledo, 446 US 635 (1980). |
The commandment in the Fourteenth Amendment that the People in each
state must give to every "person" within their jurisdiction the "equal
protection of the laws," is a codification of the Ancient Hebrew "One
Law" (for citizens and strangers alike) principle and a codification
of Jesus' Golden Rule (i.e., you and your neighbors should be treated
equally by all humans administering the power of the sword). "It
sought equality of treatment of all persons ... similarly situated.
.... It means that no person or class of persons shall be denied
the same protection of the
laws which is enjoyed by other persons or other classes in the same
place and under like circumstances." Truax v. Corrigan, 257 US
312, 331, 338 (1921).
http://billstclair.com/ferran/markferran1.html
The Due Process of Law commandment in the Fourteenth Amendment is a
codification of the rule prescribed in Deuteronomy that the King
shall read and keep within the Law, and deviate neither to The Right
Nor to The Left, nor shall he commit theft, nor murder. "The due
process clause requires that every man shall have ... the benefit of
the general law, ... so
that every citizen shall hold his life, liberty and property and
immunities under the protection of the general rules which govern
society. It of course tends to secure equality...." Truax v.
Corrigan, 257 US 312, 331, 338 (1921).
http://billstclair.com/ferran/markferran1.html
The Judeo-Christian pedigree of the Law Clauses of the Fourteenth
Amendment is why the Devil now seeks to use deceit and earthly hosts
of deceit to tear down that Christian Law. That is why you have
Teachers of the Law today, like the Whitewashed Tombs of old,
declaring that only certain people are "neighbors" entitled to the
protection of the Golden Rule prescribed in the Fourteenth
Amendment. The methods of the Devil have not changed. The words
of the Constitution have not changed. What has changed is that the
Churches no longer teach the Constitution as containing the
Expressed Will of God on Earth, and the People no longer recognize
that God's Commandments already were, after much bloody struggle and
Martyrdom, written into the Constitution of the United States.
You can read the Congressional Debates (links below) during the 39th
(1866) and 41st Congress (1871) which thoroughly discuss the
purposes of the Fourteenth Amendment. First, I recommend that you
read Jon Roland's recitation of the legislative history and purposes
of the Fourteenth Amendment, at:
http://www.constitution.org/col/intent_14th.htm
Then read the "Act to Enforce the Provisions of the Fourteenth
Amendment (April 20, 1871) (now codified as 42 USC sections 1983, 1985
and 1986) and read the bare-majority opinion and the Dissenting
Opinions in the Slaughter House cases (1871), and read the decision
appealed from in that case (which held that the Civil Rights Act of
1866 benefited "white citizens").
If you want to understand the Fourteenth Amendment, and 42 U.S.C.
section
1983, 1985, and 1986, and its Christian Purposes, read the
Congressional
Globe that includes the Debates leading up to the enactment of the Act
to
Enforce the Fourteenth Amendment on April 20, 1871:
http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llcg&fileName=100/llcg100.db&recNum=2
I will warn you, reading this History may make you sad and angry as an
American to
realize what contemporary Judges have done to destroy this Christian
Law, and the hope
it once offered to mankind. See, Part 1 and Part 2 at
http://billstclair.com/ferran
Here is the list of Pages of the 1871 Congressional Globe containing
the
debates on the Bill that became The civil rights act of 1871 (the Act
to Enforce the Fourteenth Amendment), and 42 USC s 1983, 1985, 1986:
H. R. No. 320-- "To enforce the provisions of the fourteenth amendment
to
the Constitution of the United States."--[By Mr. Shellabarger.]
Reported, 317; discussed, 317, 329, 335, 351, 361, 364, 376, 393, 397,
408,
409, 421, 436, 441, 463, 475, 489, 490, 508; passed, 522;
explanations, 582;
passed Senate with amendments, 716; discussed, 723; conference, 725,
734;
conference report, 749; discussed, 750, 787, 798; report agreed to by
Senate, 749; rejected by House, 801; new conference, 801, 802;
conference
report, 804; discussed, 804; agreed to by House, 808; by Senate, 804;
enrolled, 833; approved, 838.
In Senate: Received from House, 523; referred, 523; reported, 538;
discussed, 567, 599, 645, 653, 685, 686; passed with amendments, 709;
conference, 727, 728; conference report, 754; discussed, 754, 769,
773;
concurred in by Senate, 779; disagreed to by House, 810; new
conference,
810; conference report, 819; discussed, 819; concurred in by Senate,
831; by
House, 832; enrolled, 832.
http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?ammem/hlaw:@field(DOCID+@lit(cg0994
As for the Ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment, it was a Peace
Treaty between the former states in the South (who had effectively
seceded) and the victorious coalition of States in the North. The
first American Civil War was waged between states, and the Peace
Treaty (14th Amendment) was Ratified in accordance with principles
International Law and the Law of War. Those southern states who had
waived and forfeited their Constitutional Rights as member-states of
the Union had no legal standing to complain that they were later
"forced" or coerced into ratifying that Amendment as a condition to
their re-admission to the Union. The provision of the 14th Amendment
which gave Congress the power to deny Offices within the Government of
the United States to formerly rebellious southerners was necessary to
prevent by means of "infiltration" the destruction of the Union which
had been attempted by the recent War between the states.
The Provisions relating to citizenship and protection of "persons"
were immediately necessary to empower Congress to prevent the
southern states from again denying the protection of the Law, and
the status of state-citizens, to those citizens of the United States
who had remained loyal within, or who later entered with loyalty to,
the Union. Those Treaty provisions, giving Congress the Power to
enforce those principles of International Law, were Necessary in
order to preserve the Peace which had been secured at a great cost
to human Life, Liberty and Property. The Fourteenth Amendment was
NECESSARY to the preservation of the "more perfect Union" of
American states, and it "grew out of the feeling that a union which
had been maintained by such costly sacrifices was, after all,
worthless if a citizen could not be protected in all his fundamental
rights everywhere- North and South, East and West-throughout the
limits of the Republic."
Salus populi est suprema lex.
(The welfare of the people is the supreme law)
What the later People of the "more perfect Union" have done, or
allowed to be done, to themselves since then, under color of the
16th Amendment, the Spending Clause, the Commerce Clause, and the
Equal Protection Clause, is wholly their own responsibility, because
they had the Power to Vote, as "citizens of the United States,"
except to the extent that what has been done has been done by Lying
Divinations of Federal Judges who have been placed into
Tenure almost completely beyond the Republican Forms of our
Government. The Impeachment Power of Congress has been far too
idle.
In my opinion, the current Justices of the Supreme Court can be and
ought to be Impeached for effectively repudiating and repealing the
fundamental Constitutional principles of Magna Carta that are
EXPRESSLY incorporated in the Due Process of Law provisions of the
Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. Repudiating Magna Carta is the
ultimate "deal-breaker" among those who would otherwise support a
Government, and justifies those who would alter or abolish that
Government.
Mark R. Ferran BSEE scl JD mcl