Theunconstitutional14thAmendmentPart1of4Introduction

ThistreatiseontheunconstitutionalityoftheFourteenthAmendmentisbaseduponthemostcomprehensiveresearchanddocumentationofeveryangleconcerningtheunlawfulproceduresinvolvedinitspurportedadoption.Thisworkwasdoneandisofferedwitharealizationthatthefederalcourtsarenotreadytogiveconsiderationtothesubject,becausetheU.S.SupremeCourtandinferiorcourtshaveusedthe14thAmendmenttoenlargeupontheirungrantedpowerswithoutlimitorreserve.SocialistorganizedanddirectedviolentmassdemonstrationsandarmedrebellioninthenationscapitalandinmanyAmericancitiesareextortingfromCongressmoreandmoreradicallegislation.These"laws"threatenbasicpersonalfreedom,privatepropertyrightsandencroachuponanddestroymoreandmoretheconstitutionalrightofselfgovernmentbythepeopleonstateandlocallevels.Executiveordersextendtowardfurtherfederalcontrolofeveryaspectoflifeinthenation,eitherbyshuttingofffederalfundstothosewhowillnotsubscribetotheirforceddictumsorbycourtinjunctiveorderstothesameeffect.Thereliesthegreatestdangertoourcountrysfuture:sothattheendresultinthenextorsucceedinggenerationcanonlybeadeterioratedindustrialempireandaweakenednationaldefense,whichmustresultinabjectsurrendertoourmortalenemyworldwidesocialismandtotalitarianism.Thatistheultimateendofthesubversiveuseoftheunconstitutional14thAmendment.Itishopedthatthistreatise,exposingtheabsoluteunconstitutionalityofthel4thAmendment,willbegivensufficientgeneralcirculationandpublicitytoawakena"consensus"ofpublicsentimenttoreachtheseatsofpowerinWashington,D.C.,sothatultimatelythestampofunconstitutionalitymaybeplaceduponthe14thAmendment,andconstitutionalgovernmentandnationalsanityoncemoremayprevail.CitesandReferences:CongressionalRecordSenate,84thCon.1stSession.,Vol.101,pp.7119to7124Senate,86thCon.,2ndSession.,Vol.106,pp.4036to4038Senate,89thCon.,1stSession.,Vol.III,pp.10669to10671.

The14thAmendmentisunconstitutionalThepurported14thAmendmenttotheUnitedStatesConstitutionisandshouldbeheldtobeineffective,invalid,null,voidandunconstitutionalforthefollowingreasons:

TheJointResolutionproposingsaidamendmentwasnotsubmittedtooradoptedbyaConstitutionalCongressperArticleI,Section3,andArticleVoftheU.S.Constitution.

TheJointResolutionwasnotsubmittedtothePresidentforhisapprovalasrequiredbyArticleI,Section7oftheConstitution.

Theproposed14thAmendmentwasrejectedbymorethanonefourthofalltheStatesthenintheUnion,anditwasneverratifiedbythreefourthsofalltheStatesintheUnionasrequiredbyArticleVoftheU.S.Constitution.

TheunconstitutionalCongressTheU.S.ConstitutionprovidesinArticleI,Section3:"TheSenateoftheUnitedStatesshallbecomposedoftwoSenatorsfromeachState."

ArticleVprovides:"NoState,withoutitsconsent,shallbedeprivedofitsequalsuffrageintheSenate."Thefactthat28SenatorshadbeenunlawfullyexcludedfromtheU.S.Senate,inordertosecureatwothirdsvoteforadoptionoftheJointResolutionproposingthe14thAmendmentisshownbyResolutionsofprotestadoptedbythefollowingStateLegislatures.TheNewJerseyLegislature,byResolutionofMarch27,1868,protestedasfollows:"Thesaidproposedamendmentnothavingyetreceivedtheassentthethreefourthsofthestates,whichisnecessarytomakeitvalid,thenaturalandconstitutionalrightofthisstatetowithdrawitsassentisundeniable."Thatitbeingnecessarybytheconstitutionthateveryamendmenttothesameshouldbeproposedbytwothirdsofbothhousesofcongress,theauthorsofsaidproposition,forthepurposeofsecuringtheassentoftherequisitemajority,determinedto,anddid,excludefromthesaidtwohouseseightyrepresentativesfromelevenstatesoftheunion,uponthepretencethattherewerenosuchstatesintheUnion:but,findingthattwothirdsoftheremainderofthesaidhousescouldnotbebroughttoassenttothesaidproposition,theydeliberatelyformedandcarriedoutthedesignofmutilatingtheintegrityoftheUnitedStatessenate,andwithoutanypretextorjustification,otherthanthepossessionofthepower,withouttheright,andinpalpableviolationoftheconstitution,ejectedamemberoftheirownbody,representingthisstate,andthuspracticallydeniedtoNewJerseyitsequalsuffrageinthesenate,andtherebynominallysecuredthevoteoftwothirdsofthesaidhouses."1TheAlabamaLegislatureprotestedagainstbeingdeprivedofrepresentationintheSenateoftheU.S.Congress.2TheTexasLegislaturebyResolutiononOctober15,1866,protestedasfollows:"TheamendmenttotheConstitutionproposedbythisjointresolutionasarticleXIVispresentedtotheLegislatureofTexasforitsactionthereon,underArticleVofthatConstitution.ThisarticleV,providingthemodeofmakingamendmentstothatinstrument,contemplatestheparticipationbyalltheStatesthroughtheirrepresentativesinCongress,inproposingamendments.AsrepresentativesfromnearlyonethirdoftheStateswereexcludedfromtheCongressproposingtheamendments,theconstitutionalrequirementwasnotcompliedwithitwasviolatedinletterandinspiritandtheproposingoftheseamendmentstoStateswhichwereexcludedfromallparticipationintheirinitiationinCongress,isanullity."3TheArkansasLegislature,byResolutiononDecember17,1866,protestedasfollows:"TheConstitutionauthorizedtwothirdsofbothhousesofCongresstoproposeamendmentsand,aselevenStateswereexcludedfromdeliberationanddecisionupontheonenowsubmitted,theconclusionisinevitablethatitisnotproposedbylegalauthority,butinpalpableviolationoftheConstitution."4TheGeorgiaLegislature,byResolutiononNovember9,1866,protestedasfollows:"SincethereorganizationoftheStategovernment,GeorgiahaselectedSenatorsandRepresentatives.SohaseveryotherState.Theyhavebeenarbitrarilyrefusedadmissiontotheirseats,notonthegroundthatthequalificationsofthememberselecteddidnotconformtothefourthparagraph,secondsection,firstarticleoftheConstitution,butbecausetheirrightofrepresentationwasdeniedbyaportionoftheStateshavingequalbutnotgreaterrightsthanthemselves.Theyhaveinfactbeenforciblyexcludedand,inasmuchasalllegislativepowergrantedbytheStatestotheCongressisdefined,andthispowerofexclusionisnotamongthepowersexpresslyorbyimplication,

theassemblage,atthecapitol,ofrepresentativesfromaportionoftheStates,totheexclusionoftherepresentativesofanotherportion,cannotbeaconstitutionalCongress,whentherepresentationofeachStateformsanintegralpartofthewhole."ThisamendmentistenderedtoGeorgiaforratification,underthatpowerintheConstitutionwhichauthorizestwothirdsoftheCongresstoproposeamendments.WehaveendeavoredtoestablishthatGeorgiahadaright,inthefirstplace,asapartoftheCongress,toactuponthequestion,Shalltheseamendmentsbeproposed?EveryotherexcludedStatehadthesameright."Thefirstconstitutionalprivilegehasbeenarbitrarilydenied."HadtheseamendmentsbeensubmittedtoaconstitutionalCongress,theyneverwouldhavebeenproposedtotheStates.TwothirdsofthewholeCongressneverwouldhaveproposedtoelevenStatesvoluntarilytoreducetheirpoliticalpowerintheUnion,andatthesametime,disfranchisethelargerportionoftheintellect,integrityandpatriotismofelevencoequalStates."5TheFloridaLegislature,byResolutionofDecember5,1866,protestedasfollows:"LetthisalterationbemadeintheorganicsystemandsomenewandmorestartlingdemandsmayormaynotberequiredbythepredominantpartyprevioustoallottingthetenStatesnowunlawfullyandunconstitutionallydeprivedoftheirrightofrepresentationtoentertheHallsoftheNationalLegislature.TheirrighttorepresentationisguaranteedbytheConstitutionofthiscountryandthereisnoact,noteventhatofrebellion,candeprivethemofitsexercise."6TheSouthCarolinaLegislaturebyResolutionofNovember27,1866,protestedasfollows:"ElevenoftheSouthernStates,includingSouthCarolina,aredeprivedoftheirrepresentationinCongress.AlthoughtheirSenatorsandRepresentativeshavebeendulyelectedandhavepresentedthemselvesforthepurposeoftakingtheirseats,theircredentialshave,inmostinstances,beenlaiduponthetablewithoutbeingread,orhavebeenreferredtoacommittee,whohavefailedtomakeanyreportonthesubject.Inshort,CongresshasrefusedtoexerciseitsConstitutionalfunctions,anddecideeitherupontheelection,thereturn,orthequalificationoftheseselectedbytheStatesandpeopletorepresentus.SomeoftheSenatorsandRepresentativesfromtheSouthernStateswerepreparedtotakethetestoath,buteventhesehavebeenpersistentlyignored,andkeptoutoftheseatstowhichtheywereentitledundertheConstitutionandlaws."HencethisamendmenthasnotbeenproposedbytwothirdsofbothHousesofalegallyconstitutedCongress,andisnot,Constitutionallyorlegitimately,beforeasingleLegislatureforratification."7TheNorthCarolinaLegislatureprotestedbyResolutionofDecember6,1866asfollows:"TheFederalConstitutiondeclares,insubstance,thatCongressshallconsistofaHouseofRepresentatives,composedofmembersapportionedamongtherespectiveStatesintheratiooftheirpopulation,andofaSenate,composedoftwomembersfromeachState.AndintheArticlewhichconcernsAmendments,itisexpresslyprovidedthatnoState,withoutitsconsent,shallbedeprivedofitsequalsuffrageintheSenate.ThecontemplatedAmendmentwasnotproposedtotheStatesbyaCongressthusconstituted.Atthetimeofitsadoption,theelevensecedingStatesweredeprivedofrepresentationbothintheSenateandHouse,althoughtheyall,excepttheStateofTexas,hadSenatorsandRepresentativesdulyelectedandclaimingtheirprivilegesundertheConstitution.Inconsequenceofthis,theseStateshadnovoiceontheimportantquestionofproposingtheAmendment.Hadtheybeenallowedtogivetheirvotes,thepropositionwoulddoubtlesshavefailedtocommandtherequiredtwothirdsmajority.

"IfthevotesoftheseStatesarenecessarytoavalidratificationoftheAmendment,theywereequallynecessaryonthequestionofproposingittotheStatesforitwouldbedifficult,intheopinionoftheCommittee,toshowbywhatprocessinlogic,menofintelligencecouldarriveatadifferentconclusion."8JointresolutionineffectiveArticleI,Section7oftheUnitedStatesConstitutionprovidesthatnotonlyeverybillwhichshallhavebeenpassedbytheHouseofRepresentativesandtheSenateoftheUnitedStatesCongress,butthat:"EveryOrder,Resolution,orVotetowhichtheConcurrenceoftheSenateandHouseofRepresentativesmaybenecessary(exceptonaquestionofAdjournment)shallbepresentedtothePresidentoftheUnitedStatesandbeforetheSameshalltakeEffect,shallbeapprovedbyhim,orbeingdisapprovedbyhimshallberepassedbytwothirdsoftheSenateandHouseofRepresentatives,accordingtotheRulesandLimitationsprescribedintheCaseofaBill."TheJointResolutionproposingthe14thAmendment9wasneverpresentedtothePresidentoftheUnitedStatesforhisapproval,asPresidentAndrewJohnsonstatedinhismessageonJune22,1866.10Therefore,theJointResolutiondidnottakeeffect.(Continued)1.NewJerseyActs,March27,1868.2.AlabamaHouseJournal1868,pp.210213.3.TexasHouseJournal,1866,p.577.4.ArkansasHouseJournal,1866,p.287.5.GeorgiaHouseJournal,November9,1866,pp.6667.6.FloridaHouseJournal,1866,p.76.7.SouthCarolinaHouseJournal,1868,pp.3334.8.NorthCarolinaSenateJournal,186667,pp.9293.9.14Stat.358etc.10.SenateJournal,39thCongress,1stSession,p.563HouseJournal,p.889.

Theunconstitutional14thAmendmentPart2of4Therewasneitheraquoruminthefirstplace,norwasitratifiedby

threefourthsofthestates.1.Pretermittingtheineffectivenessofsaidresolution,asalreadyshown,fifteen(15)Statesoutofthethenthirtyseven(37)StatesoftheUnionrejectedtheproposed14thAmendmentbetweenthedateofitssubmissiontotheStatesbytheSecretaryofStateonJune16,1866andMarch24,1868,therebyfurthernullifyingsaidresolutionandmakingitimpossibleforitsratificationbytheconstitutionallyrequiredthreefourthsofsuchStates,asshownintherejectionsthereofbytheLegislaturesofthefollowingstates:Texasrejectedthe14thAmendmentonOct.27,1866.11Georgiarejectedthe14thAmendmentonNov.9,1866.12Floridarejectedthe14thAmendmentonDec.6,1866.13Alabamarejectedthe14thAmendmentonDec.7,1866.14NorthCarolinarejectedthe14thAmendmentonDec.14,1866.15

Arkansasrejectedthe14thAmendmentonDec.17,1866.16SouthCarolinarejectedthe14thAmendmentonDec.20,1866.17Kentuckyrejectedthe14thAmendmentonJan.8,1867.18Virginiarejectedthe14thAmendmentonJan.9,1867.19Louisianarejectedthe14thAmendmentonFeb.6,1867.20Delawarerejectedthe14thAmendmentonFeb.7,1867.21Marylandrejectedthel4thAmendmentonMar.23,1867.22Mississippirejectedthe14thAmendmentonJan.31,1867.23Ohiorejectedthe14thAmendmentonJan.16,1868.24NewJerseyrejectedthe14thAmendmentonMar.24,1868.25TherewasnoquestionthatalloftheSouthernstateswhichrejectedthe14thAmendmenthadlegallyconstitutedgovernments,werefullyrecognizedbythefederalgovernment,andwerefunctioningasmemberstatesoftheUnionatthetimeoftheirrejection.PresidentAndrewJohnson,inhisVetomessageofMarch2,1867,26pointedoutthat:"ItisnotdeniedthattheStatesinquestionhaveeachofthemanactualgovernmentwithallthepowers,executive,judicialandlegislative,whichproperlybelongtoafreeState.TheyareorganizedliketheotherStatesoftheUnion,and,likethemtheymake,administer,andexecutethelawswhichconcerntheirdomesticaffairs."IffurtherproofwereneededthattheseStateswereoperatingunderlegallyconstitutedgovernmentsasmemberStatesintheUnion,theratificationofthe13thAmendmentbyDecember8,1865undoubtedlysuppliesthisofficialproof.IftheSouthernStateswerenotmemberStatesoftheUnion,the13thamendmentwouldnothavebeensubmittedtotheirLegislaturesforratification.2.The13thAmendmenttotheUnitedStatesConstitutionwasproposedbyJointResolutionofCongress27andwasapprovedFebruary1,1865byPresidentAbrahamLincoln,asrequiredbyArticleI,Section7oftheUnitedStatesConstitution.ThePresidentssignatureisaffixedtotheResolution.The13thAmendmentwasratifiedby27statesofthethen36statesoftheUnion,includingtheSouthernStatesofVirginia,Louisiana,Arkansas,SouthCarolina,Alabama,NorthCarolinaandGeorgia.ThisisshownbytheProclamationoftheSecretaryofStateDecember18,1865.28WithoutthevotesofthesesevenSouthernStateLegislaturesthe13thAmendmentwouldhavefailed.TherecanbenodoubtbutthattheratificationbytheseSouthernStatesofthe13thAmendmentagainestablishedthefactthattheirLegislaturesandStategovernmentsweredulyandlawfullyconstitutedandfunctioningassuchundertheirStateConstitutions.3.Furthermore,onApril2,1866,PresidentAndrewJohnsonissuedaproclamationthat,"theinsurrectionwhichheretoforeexistedintheStatesofGeorgia,SouthCarolina,Virginia,NorthCarolina,Tennessee,Alabama,Louisiana,Arkansas,MississippiandFloridaisatanend,andishenceforthtobesoregarded."29OnAugust20,1866,PresidentAndrewJohnsonissuedanotherproclamation30pointingoutthefactthattheHouseofRepresentativesandSenatehadadoptedidenticalResolutionsonJuly22nd31andJuly26th,1861,32thattheCivilWarforcedbydisunionistsoftheSouthernStates,wasnotwagedforthepurposeofconquestortooverthrowtherightsandestablishedinstitutionsofthoseStates,buttodefendandmaintainthesupremacyoftheConstitutionandtopreservetheUnionwithallequalityandrightsoftheseveralstatesunimpaired,andthatassoonastheseobjectswereaccomplished,thewaroughttocease.ThePresidentsproclamationonJune13,1866,declaredtheinsurrectionin

theStateofTennesseehadbeensuppressed.33ThePresidentsproclamationonApril2,1866,34declaredtheinsurrectionintheotherSouthernStates,exceptTexas,nolongerexisted.OnAugust20,1866,35thePresidentproclaimedthattheinsurrectionintheStateofTexashadbeencompletelyendedandhisproclamationcontinued:"theinsurrectionwhichheretoforeexistedintheStateofTexasisatanend,andistobehenceforthsoregardedinthatState,asintheotherStatesbeforenamedinwhichthesaidinsurrectionwasproclaimedtobeatanendbytheaforesaidproclamationoftheseconddayofApril,onethousand,eighthundredandsixtysix."AndIdofurtherproclaimthatthesaidinsurrectionisatanend,andthatpeace,order,tranquillity,andcivilauthoritynowexist,inandthroughoutthewholeoftheUnitedStatesofAmerica."4.WhentheStateofLouisianarejectedthe14thAmendmentonFebruary6,1867,makingthe10thstatetohaverejectedthesame,ormorethanonefourthofthetotalnumberof36statesoftheUnionasofthatdate,thusleavinglessthanthreefourthsofthestatespossiblytoratifythesame,theAmendmentfailedofratificationinfactandinlaw,anditcouldnothavebeenrevivedexceptbyanewJointResolutionoftheSenateandHouseofRepresentativesinaccordancewithConstitutionalrequirement.5.Facedwiththepositivefailureofratificationofthe14thAmendment,bothHousesofCongresspassedoverthevetoofthePresidentthreeActsknownasReconstructionActs,betweenthedatesofMarch2andJuly19,1867,especiallythethirdofsaidActs,15Stat.p.14etc.,designedillegallytoremovewith"Militaryforce"thelawfullyconstitutedStateLegislaturesofthetenSouthernStatesofVirginia,NorthCarolina,SouthCarolina,Georgia,Florida,Alabama,Mississippi,Arkansas,LouisianaandTexas.InPresidentAndrewJohnsonsVetomessageontheReconstructionActofMarch2,1867,36hepointedouttheseunconstitutionalities:"IfevertheAmericancitizenshouldbelefttothefreeexerciseofhisownjudgment,itiswhenheisengagedintheworkofformingthefundamentallawunderwhichheistolive.Thatworkishiswork,anditcannotproperlybetakenoutofhishands.AllthislegislationproceedsuponthecontraryassumptionthatthepeopleofeachoftheseStatesshallhavenoconstitution,exceptsuchasmaybearbitrarilydictatedbyCongress,andformedundertherestraintofmilitaryrule.Aplainstatementoffactsmakesthisevident."InalltheseStatesthereareexistingconstitutions,framedintheaccustomedwaybythepeople.Congress,however,declaresthattheseconstitutionsarenotloyalandrepublican,andrequiresthepeopletoformthemanew.What,then,intheopinionofCongress,isnecessarytomaketheconstitutionofaStateloyalandrepublican?Theoriginalactanswersthequestion:Itisuniversalnegrosuffrage,aquestionwhichthefederalConstitutionleavesexclusivelytotheStatesthemselves.Allthislegislativemachineryofmartiallaw,militarycoercion,andpoliticaldisfranchisementisavowedlyforthatpurposeandnoneother.TheexistingconstitutionsofthetenStatesconformtotheacknowledgedstandardsofloyaltyandrepublicanism.Indeed,iftherearedegreesinrepublicanformsofgovernment,theirconstitutionsaremorerepublicannow,thanwhentheseStatesfourofwhichweremembersoftheoriginalthirteenfirstbecamemembersoftheUnion."InPresidentAndrewJohnsonsVetomessageontheReconstructionActonJuly19,1867,hepointedoutvariousunconstitutionalitiesasfollows:

"Thevetooftheoriginalbillofthe2dofMarchwasbasedontwodistinctgrounds,theinterferenceofCongressinmattersstrictlyappertainingtothereservedpowersoftheStates,andtheestablishmentofmilitarytribunalsforthetrialofcitizensintimeofpeace."Asingularcontradictionisapparenthere.CongressdeclarestheselocalStategovernmentstobeillegalgovernments,andthenprovidesthattheseillegalgovernmentsshallbecarriedonbyfederalofficers,whoaretoperformtheverydutiesonitsownofficersbythisillegalStateauthority.ItcertainlywouldbeanovelspectacleifCongressshouldattempttocarryonalegalStategovernmentbytheagencyofitsownofficers.ItisyetmorestrangethatCongressattemptstosustainandcarryonanillegalStategovernmentbythesamefederalagency."ItisnowtoolatetosaythatthesetenpoliticalcommunitiesarenotStatesofthisUnion.DeclarationstothecontrarymadeinthesethreeactsarecontradictedagainandagainbyrepeatedactsoflegislationenactedbyCongressfromtheyear1861totheyear1867."Duringthatperiod,whiletheseStateswereinactualrebellion,andafterthatrebellionwasbroughttoaclose,theyhavebeenagainandagainrecognizedasStatesoftheUnion.RepresentationhasbeenapportionedtothemasStates.TheyhavebeendividedintojudicialdistrictsfortheholdingofdistrictandcircuitcourtsoftheUnitedStates,asStatesoftheUniononlycanbedistricted.ThelastactonthissubjectwaspassedJuly28,1866,bywhicheveryoneofthesetenStateswasarrangedintodistrictsandcircuits."TheyhavebeencalleduponbyCongresstoactthroughtheirlegislaturesuponatleasttwoamendmentstotheConstitutionoftheUnitedStates.AsStatestheyhaveratifiedoneamendment,whichrequiredthevoteoftwentysevenStatesofthethirtysixthencomposingtheUnion.WhentherequisitetwentysevenvotesweregiveninfavorofthatamendmentsevenofwhichvotesweregivenbysevenofthesetenStatesitwasproclaimedtobeapartoftheConstitutionoftheUnitedStates,andslaverywasdeclarednolongertoexistwithintheUnitedStatesoranyplacesubjecttotheirjurisdiction.IfthesesevenStateswerenotlegalStatesoftheUnion,itfollowsasaninevitableconsequencethatinsomeoftheStatesslaveryyetexists.ItdoesnotexistinthesesevenStates,fortheyhaveabolisheditalsointheirStateconstitutionsbutKentuckynothavingdoneso,itwouldstillremaininthatState.But,intruth,ifthisassumptionthattheseStateshavenolegalStategovernmentsbetrue,thentheabolitionofslaverybytheseillegalgovernmentsbindsnoone,forCongressnowdeniestotheseStatesthepowertoabolishslaverybydenyingtothemthepowertoelectalegalStatelegislature,ortoframeaconstitutionforanypurpose,evenforsuchapurposeastheabolitionofslavery."Astotheotherconstitutionalamendmenthavingreferencetosuffrage,ithappensthattheseStateshavenotacceptedit.Theconsequenceis,thatithasneverbeenproclaimedorunderstood,evenbyCongress,tobeapartoftheConstitutionoftheUnitedStates.TheSenateoftheUnitedStateshasrepeatedlygivenitssanctiontotheappointmentofjudges,districtattorneys,andmarshalsforeveryoneoftheseStatesyet,iftheyarenotlegalStates,notoneofthesejudgesisauthorizedtoholdacourt.So,too,bothhousesofCongresshavepassedappropriationbillstopayallthesejudges,attorneys,andofficersoftheUnitedStatesforexercisingtheirfunctionsintheseStates."Again,inthemachineryoftheinternalrevenuelaws,alltheseStatesaredistricted,notasTerritories,butasStates.

"Somuchforcontinuouslegislativerecognition.Theinstancescited,however,fallfarshortofallthatmightbeenumerated.Executiverecognition,asiswellknown,hasbeenfrequentandunwavering.ThesamemaybesaidastojudicialrecognitionthroughtheSupremeCourtoftheUnitedStates."Tometheseconsiderationsareconclusiveoftheunconstitutionalityofthispartofthebillnowbeforeme,andIearnestlycommendtheirconsiderationtothedeliberatejudgmentofCongress."WithinaperiodlessthanayearthelegislationofCongresshasattemptedtostriptheexecutivedepartmentofthegovernmentofsomeofitsessentialpowers.TheConstitution,andtheoathprovidedinit,devolveuponthePresidentthepoweranddutytoseethatthelawsarefaithfullyexecuted.TheConstitution,inordertocarryoutthispower,giveshimthechoiceoftheagents,andmakesthemsubjecttohiscontrolandsupervision.ButintheexecutionoftheselawstheconstitutionalobligationuponthePresidentremains,butthepowerstoexercisethatconstitutionaldutyiseffectuallytakenaway.Themilitarycommanderis,astothepowerofappointment,madetotaketheplaceofitsPresident,andtheGeneraloftheArmytheplaceoftheSenateandanyattemptonthepartofthePresidenttoasserthisownconstitutionalpowermay,underpretenceoflaw,bemetbyofficialinsubordination.Itistobefearedthatthesemilitaryofficers,lookingtotheauthoritygivenbytheselawsratherthantotheletteroftheConstitution,willrecognizenoauthoritybutthecommanderofthedistrictandtheGeneralofthearmy."Iftherewerenootherobjectionthanthistothisproposedlegislation,itwouldbesufficient."(Continued)11.HouseJournal1868,pp.578584SenateJournal1866,p.471.12.HouseJournal1866,p.68SenateJournal1886,p.72.13.HouseJournal1866,p.76SenateJournal1866,p.8.14.HouseJournall866,pp.210213SenateJournal1866,p.183.15.HouseJournal18661867.p.183SenateJournal18661867,p.138.16.HouseJournal1866,pp.288291SenateJournal1866,p.262.17.HouseJournal1866,p.284SenateJournal1866,p.230.18.HouseJournal1867,p.60SenateJournal1867,p.62.19.HouseJournal18661867,p.108SenateJournal18661867,p.101.20.McPherson,Reconstruction,p.194AnnualEncyclopedia,p.452.21.HouseJournal1867,p.223SenateJournal1867,p.176.22.HouseJournal1867,p.1141SenateJournal1867,p.808.23.McPherson,Reconstruction,p.194.24.HouseJournal1868,pp.4450SenateJournal1868,pp.3338.25.MinutesoftheAssembly1868,p.743SenateJournal1868,p.356.26.HouseJournal,80thCongress,2ndSession,p.563etc.27.13Stat.p.567.28.18Stat.p.774.29.PresidentialProclamationNo.153,GeneralRecordoftheUnitedStates,G.S.A.,NationalArchivesandRecordsService.3014Stat.p.814.31.HouseJournal,37thCongress,1stSession,p.123etc.32.SenateJournal,37thCongress,1stSession,p.91etc.33.13Stat.p.763.34.14Stat.p.811.35.14Stat.p.814.36HouseJournal,39thCongress,2ndSession.p.563etc.

Theunconstitutional14thAmendmentPart3of4SpreadingLincolniandemocracy

PresidentAndrewJohnsonendedhisvetomessageregardingtheReconstructionActonJuly19,1867asfollows:"[I]ntheexecutionoftheselawstheconstitutionalobligationuponthePresidentremains,butthepowerstoexercisethatconstitutionaldutyiseffectuallytakenaway.Themilitarycommanderis,astothepowerofappointment,madetotaketheplaceofitsPresident,andtheGeneraloftheArmytheplaceoftheSenateandanyattemptonthepartofthePresidenttoasserthisownconstitutionalpowermay,underpretenceoflaw,bemetbyofficialinsubordination.Itistobefearedthatthesemilitaryofficers,lookingtotheauthoritygivenbytheselawsratherthantotheletteroftheConstitution,willrecognizenoauthoritybutthecommanderofthedistrictandtheGeneralofthearmy."Iftherewerenootherobjectionthanthistothisproposedlegislation,itwouldbesufficient."NoonecancontendthattheReconstructionActswereeverupheldasbeingvalidandconstitutional.Theywerebroughtintoquestion,buttheCourtseitheravoideddecisionorwerepreventedbyCongressfromfinallyadjudicatingupontheirconstitutionality.InMississippiv.PresidentAndrewJohnson,(4Wall.475502),wherethesuitsoughttoenjointhePresidentoftheUnitedStatesfromenforcingprovisionsoftheReconstructionActs,theU.S.SupremeCourtheldthatthePresidentcannotbeenjoinedbecausefortheJudicialDepartmentofthegovernmenttoattempttoenforcetheperformanceofthedutiesbythePresidentmightbejustlycharacterized,inthelanguageofChiefJusticeMarshall,as"anabsurdandexcessiveextravagance."TheCourtfurthersaidthatiftheCourtgrantedtheinjunctionagainstenforcementoftheReconstructionActs,andifthePresidentrefusedobedience,itisneedlesstoobservethattheCourtiswithoutpowertoenforceitsprocess.

AndnowtotheCourtInajointaction,thestatesofGeorgiaandMississippibroughtsuitagainstthePresidentandtheSecretaryofWar,(6Wall.5078,154U.S.554).TheCourtsaidthat:"ThebillthensetsforththattheintentanddesignoftheactsofCongress,asapparentontheirfaceandbytheirterms,aretooverthrowandannulthisexistingstategovernment,andtoerectanotheranddifferentgovernmentinitsplace,unauthorizedbytheConstitutionandindefianceofitsguarantiesandthat,infurtheranceofthisintentanddesign,thedefendants,theSecretaryofWar,theGeneraloftheArmy,andMajorGeneralPope,actingunderordersofthePresident,areaboutsettinginmotionaportionofthearmytotakemilitarypossessionofthestate,andthreatentosubverthergovernmentandsubjectherpeopletomilitaryrulethatthestateisholdinginadequatemeanstoresistthepowerandforceoftheExecutiveDepartmentoftheUnitedStatesandshethereforeinsiststhatsuchprotectioncan,andoughttobeaffordedbyadecreeororderofthiscourtinthepremises."TheapplicationsforinjunctionbythesetwostatestoprohibittheExecutiveDepartmentfromcarryingouttheprovisionsoftheReconstructionActsdirectedtotheoverthrowoftheirgovernment,includingthedissolutionoftheirstatelegislatures,weredeniedonthegroundsthattheorganizationofthegovernmentintothreegreatdepartments,theexecutive,legislativeandjudicial,carriedlimitationsof

thepowersofeachbytheConstitution.ThiscasewentthesamewayasthepreviouscaseofMississippiagainstPresidentJohnsonandwasdismissedwithoutadjudicationupontheconstitutionalityoftheReconstructionActs.Inanothercase,exparteWilliamH.McCardle(7Wall.506515),apetitionforthewritofhabeascorpusforunlawfulrestraintbymilitaryforceofacitizennotinthemilitaryserviceoftheUnitedStateswasbeforetheUnitedStatesSupremeCourt.Afterthecasewasarguedandtakenunderadvisement,andbeforeconferenceinregardtothedecisiontobemade,CongresspassedanemergencyActMarch27,1868,15Stat.atL.44,vetoedbythePresidentandrepassedoverhisveto,repealingthejurisdictionoftheU.S.SupremeCourtinsuchcase.Accordingly,theSupremeCourtdismissedtheappealwithoutpassingupontheconstitutionalityoftheReconstructionActs,underwhichthenonmilitarycitizenwasheldbythemilitarywithoutbenefitofwritofhabeascorpusinviolationofSection9,ArticleIoftheU.S.Constitutionwhichprohibitsthesuspensionofthewritofhabeascorpus.ThatActofCongressplacedtheReconstructionactsbeyondjudicialrecourseandavoidedtestsofconstitutionality.ItisrecordedthatoneoftheSupremeCourtJustices,Grier,protestedagainsttheactionoftheCourtasfollows:"Thiscasewasfullyarguedinthebeginningofthismonth.Itisacasewhichinvolvesthelibertyandrightsnotonlyoftheappellant,butofmillionsofourfellowcitizens.Thecountryandthepartieshadarighttoexpectthatitwouldreceivetheimmediateandsolemnattentionofthecourt.Bythepostponementofthiscaseweshallsubjectourselves,whetherjustlyorunjustly,totheimputationthatwehaveevadedtheperformanceofadutyimposedonusbytheConstitution,andwaitedforlegislativeinterpositiontosupersedeouraction,andrelieveusfromresponsibility.Iamnotwillingtobeapartakeroftheeulogyoropprobriumthatmayfollow.Icanonlysay...Iamashamedthatsuchopprobriumshouldbecastuponthecourtandthatitcannotberefuted."ThetenStateswereorganizedintomilitarydistrictsundertheunconstitutional"ReconstructionActs,"theirlawfullyconstitutedlegislaturesillegallywereremovedby"militaryforce,"andtheywerereplacedbyrump,socalledlegislatures,sevenofwhichcarriedoutmilitaryordersandpretendedtoratifythe14thAmendment,asfollows:ArkansasonApril6,186838NorthCarolinaonJuly2,186839FloridaonJune9,186840LouisianaonJuly9,186841SouthCarolinaonJuly9,186842AlabamaonJuly13,186843GeorgiaonJuly21,1868.446.OftheabovesevenStateswhoselegislatureswereremovedandreplacedbyrump,socalledlegislatures,sixlegislaturesoftheStatesofLouisiana,Arkansas,SouthCarolina,Alabama,NorthCarolinaandGeorgiahadratifiedthe13thAmendment,asshownbytheSecretaryofStatesProclamationofDecember18,1865,withoutwhichsixStatesratifications,the13thAmendmentcouldnotandwouldnothavebeenratifiedbecausesaidsixStatesmadeatotalof27outof36StatesorexactlythreefourthsofthenumberrequiredbyArticleVoftheConstitutionforratification.

Furthermore,governmentsoftheStatesofLouisianaandArkansashadbeenreestablishedunderaproclamationissuedbyPresidentAbrahamLincolnDecember8,1863.45ThegovernmentofNorthCarolinahadbeenreestablishedunderaproclamationissuedbyPresidentAndrewJohnsondatedMay29,1865.46ThegovernmentofGeorgiahadbeenreestablishedunderaproclamationissuedbyPresidentAndrewJohnsondatedJune17,1865.47ThegovernmentofAlabamahadbeenreestablishedunderaproclamationissuedbyPresidentAndrewJohnsondatedJune21,1865.48ThegovernmentofSouthCarolinahadbeenreestablishedunderaproclamationissuedbyPresidentAndrewJohnsondatedJune30,1865.49Thesethree"ReconstructionActs"50underwhichtheaboveStatelegislatureswereillegallyremovedandunlawfulrumporpuppetsocalledlegislaturessubstitutedinamockefforttoratifythe14thAmendmentwereunconstitutional,nullandvoid,abinitio,andallactsdonethereunderwerealsonullandvoid,includingthepurportedratificationofthel4thAmendmentbysaidsixSouthernpuppetStatelegislaturesofArkansas,NorthCarolina,Louisiana,SouthCarolina,AlabamaandGeorgia.ThoseReconstructionActsofCongressandallactsandthingsunlawfullydonethereunderwereinviolationofArticleIV,Section4oftheUnitedStatesConstitution,whichrequiredtheUnitedStatestoguaranteeeveryStateintheUnionarepublicanformofgovernment.TheyviolatedArticleI,Section3,andArticleVoftheConstitution,whichentitledeveryStateintheUniontotwoSenators,becauseunderprovisionsoftheseunlawfulactsofCongress,tenStatesweredeprivedofhavingtwoSenators,orequalsuffrageintheSenate.7.TheSecretaryofStateexpresseddoubtastowhetherthreefourthsoftherequiredstateshadratifiedthe14thAmendment,asshownbyhisproclamationofJuly20,1868.51PromptlyonJuly21,1868,aJointResolution52wasadoptedbytheSenateandHouseofRepresentativesdeclaringthatthreefourthsoftheseveralStatesoftheUnionhadratifiedthe14thAmendment.Thatresolution,however,includedpurportedratificationsbytheunlawfulpuppetlegislaturesoffiveStates,Arkansas,NorthCarolina,Louisiana,SouthCarolinaandAlabama,whichhadpreviouslyrejectedthe14thAmendmentbyactionoftheirlawfullyconstitutedlegislatures,asaboveshown.ThisJointResolutionassumedtoperformthefunctionoftheSecretaryofStateinwhomCongress,byActofApril20,1818,hadvestedthefunctionofissuingsuchproclamationdeclaringtheratificationofConstitutionalAmendments.TheSecretaryofStatebowedtotheactionofCongressandissuedhisproclamationofJuly28,1868,53inwhichhestatedthathewasasactingunderauthorityoftheActofApril20,1818,butpursuanttosaidResolutionofJuly21,1868.Helistedthreefourthsorsoofthethen37statesashavingratifiedthe14thAmendment,includingthepurportedratificationoftheunlawfulpuppetlegislaturesoftheStatesofArkansas,NorthCarolina,Louisiana,SouthCarolinaandAlabama.Withoutsaidsixunlawfulpurportedratificationstherewouldhavebeenonly26stateslefttoratifyoutof37whenaminimumof28stateswasrequiredforratificationbythreefourthsoftheStatesoftheUnion.TheJointResolutionofCongressandtheresultingproclamationbytheSecretaryofStatealsoincludedpurportedratificationsbytheStatesofOhioandNewJersey,althoughtheproclamationrecognizedthefactthatthelegislaturesofsaidstates,severalmonthspreviously,hadwithdrawntheirratificationsandeffectivelyrejectedthe14thAmendmentinJanuary,1868,andApril,1868.

Therefore,deductingthesetwostatesfromthepurportedratificationsofthe14thAmendment,only23Stateratificationsatmostcouldbeclaimedwhereastheratificationof28States,orthreefourthsof37StatesintheUnion,wererequiredtoratifythe14thAmendment.Fromalloftheabovedocumentedhistoricfacts,itisinescapablethatthe14thAmendmentneverwasvalidlyadoptedasanarticleoftheConstitution,thatithasnolegaleffect,anditshouldbedeclaredbytheCourtstobeunconstitutional,andthereforenull,voidandofnoeffect.TheConstitutionstrikesthe14thAmendmentwithnullity.Thedefendersofthe14thAmendmentcontendthattheU.S.SupremeCourthasfinallydecideduponitsvalidity.Suchisnotthecase.(Continued)38.McPherson,Reconstruction,p.53.39.HouseJournal1868,p.15,SenateJournal1868,p.15.40.HouseJournal1868,p.9,SenateJournal1868,p.8.41.SenateJournal1868,p.21.42.HouseJournal1868,p.50,SenateJournal1868,p.12.43.SenateJournal,40thCongress.2ndSession.p.725.44.HouseJournal,1868,p.50.45.Vol.I,pp.288306Vol.II,pp.429448TheFederalandStateConstitutions,etc.,compiledunderActofCongressonJune30,1906,FrancisThorpe,WashingtonGovernmentPrintingOffice(1906).46.Same,Thorpe,Vol.V,pp.27992800.47.Same,Thorpe,Vol.II,pp.809822.48.Same,Thorpe,Vol.I,pp.116132.49.Same,Thorpe,Vol.VI,pp.32693281.50.14Stat.p.42B,etc.15Stat.p.l4,etc.51.15Stat.p.706.52.HouseJournal,40thCongress,2nd.Session.p.1126etc.53.16Stat.p.708.

Theunconstitutional14thAmendmentPart4of4Thedefendersofthe14thAmendmentcontendthattheU.S.SupremeCourthasfinallydecideduponitsvalidity.Thatsnottrue.Inwhatisconsideredtheleadingcase,Colemanv.Miller,507U.S.448,59S.Ct.972,theU.S.SupremeCourtdidnotupholdthevalidityofthe14thAmendment.Inthatcase,theCourtbrushedasideconstitutionalquestionsasthoughtheydidnotexist.Forinstance,theCourtmadethestatementthat:"ThelegislaturesofGeorgia,NorthCarolinaandSouthCarolinahadrejectedtheamendmentinNovemberandDecember,1866.NewgovernmentswereerectedinthoseStates(andinothers)underthedirectionofCongress.Thenewlegislaturesratifiedtheamendment,thatofNorthCarolinaonJuly4,1868,thatofSouthCarolinaonJuly9,1868,andthatofGeorgiaonJuly21,1868."AndtheCourtgavenoconsiderationtothefactthatGeorgia,NorthCarolinaandSouthCarolinawerethreeoftheoriginalstatesoftheUnionwithvalidandexistingconstitutionsonanequalfootingwiththeotheroriginalstatesandthoselateradmittedintotheUnion.WhatconstitutionalrightdidCongresshavetoremovethosestategovernmentsandtheirlegislaturesunderunlawfulmilitarypowersetupbytheunconstitutional"ReconstructionActs,"whichhadfortheir

purpose,thedestructionandremovaloftheselegalstategovernmentsandthenullificationoftheirConstitutions?ThefactthatthesethreestatesandsevenotherSouthernStateshadexistingConstitutions,wererecognizedasstatesoftheUnion,againandagainhadbeendividedintojudicialdistrictsforholdingtheirdistrictandcircuitcourtsoftheUnitedStateshadbeencalleduponbyCongresstoactthroughtheirlegislaturesupontwoAmendments,the13thand14th,andbytheirratificationshadactuallymadepossibletheadoptionofthe13thAmendmentaswellastheirstategovernmentshavingbeenreestablishedunderPresidentialProclamations,asshownbyPresidentAndrewJohnsonsVetomessageandproclamations,wereallbrushedasidebytheCourtinColemanbythestatementthat:"NewgovernmentswereerectedinthoseStates(andinothers)underthedirectionofCongress."andthatthesenewlegislaturesratifiedtheAmendment.TheU.S.SupremeCourtoverlookedthatitpreviouslyhadheldthatatnotimeweretheseSouthernStatesoutoftheUnion.Whitev.Hart,1871,13Wall.646,654.InColeman,theCourtdidnotadjudicateupontheinvalidityoftheActsofCongresswhichsetasidethosestateConstitutionsandabolishedtheirstatelegislaturestheCourtsimplyreferredtothefactthattheirlegallyconstitutedlegislatureshadrejectedthe14thAmendmentandthatthe"newlegislatures"hadratifiedtheAmendment.TheCourtoverlookedthefact,too,thattheStateofVirginiawasalsooneoftheoriginalstateswithitsConstitutionandLegislatureinfulloperationunderitscivilgovernmentatthetime.TheCourtalsoignoredthefactthattheothersixSouthernStates,whichweregiventhesametreatmentbyCongressundertheunconstitutional"ReconstructionActs,"allhadlegalconstitutionsandarepublicanformofgovernmentineachstate,aswasrecognizedbyCongressbyitsadmissionofthosestatesintotheUnion.TheCourtcertainlymusttakejudicialcognizanceofthefactthatbeforeanewstateisadmittedbyCongressintotheUnion,CongressenactsanEnablingAct,toenabletheinhabitantsoftheterritorytoadoptaConstitutiontosetuparepublicanformofgovernmentasaconditionprecedenttotheadmissionofthestateintotheUnion,anduponapprovalofsuchConstitution,CongressthenpassestheActofAdmissionofsuchstate.AllthiswasignoredandbrushedasidebytheCourtintheColemancase.However,inColemantheCourtinadvertentlysaidthis:"WheneverofficialnoticeisreceivedattheDepartmentofStatethatanyamendmentproposedtotheConstitutionoftheUnitedStateshasbeenadopted,accordingtotheprovisionsoftheConstitution,theSecretaryofStateshallforthwithcausetheamendmenttobepublished,withhiscertificate,specifyingtheStatesbywhichthesamemayhavebeenadopted,andthatthesamehasbecomevalid,toallintentsandpurposes,asapartoftheConstitutionoftheUnitedStates."InHawsev.Smith,1920,253U.S.221,40S.Ct.227,theU.S.SupremeCourtunmistakablyheld:"ThefiftharticleisagrantofauthoritybythepeopletoCongress.ThedeterminationofthemethodofratificationistheexerciseofanationalpowerspecificallygrantedbytheConstitutionthatpowerisconferreduponCongress,andislimitedtotwomethods,byactionoftheLegislaturesofthreefourthsofthestates,orconventionsinalikenumberofstates.Dodgev.Woolsey.18How.331,348,15L.Ed.401.TheframersoftheConstitutionmighthaveadoptedadifferentmethod.Ratificationmighthavebeenlefttoavoteofthepeople,ortosomeauthorityofgovernmentotherthanthatselected.Thelanguageofthearticleisplain,andadmitsofnodoubtinitsinterpretation.Itisnotthefunctionofcourtsorlegislativebodies,nationalorstate,toalterthemethodwhichtheConstitutionhasfixed."

Wesubmitthatinnoneofthecases,inwhichtheCourtavoidedtheconstitutionalissuesinvolvedinthecompositionoftheCongresswhichadoptedtheJointResolutionforthe14thAmendment,didtheCourtpassupontheconstitutionalityoftheCongresswhichpurportedtoadopttheJointResolutionforthe14thAmendment,with80Representativesand23Senators,ineffect,forciblyejectedordeniedtheirseatsandtheirvotesontheJointResolutionproposingtheAmendment,inordertopassthesamebyatwothirdsvote,aspointedoutintheNewJerseyLegislatureResolutiononMarch27,1868.TheconstitutionalrequirementssetforthinArticleVoftheConstitutionpermittheCongresstoproposeamendmentsonlywhenevertwothirdsofbothhousesshalldeemitnecessarythatis,twothirdsofbothhousesasthenconstitutedwithoutforcibleejections.SuchafragmentaryCongressalsoviolatedtheconstitutionalrequirementsofArticleVthatnostate,withoutitsconsent,shallbedeprivedofitsequalsuffrageintheSenate.Thereisnosuchthingasgivinglifetoanamendmentillegallyproposedorneverlegallyratifiedbythreefourthsofthestates.ThereisnosuchthingasamendmentbylachesnosuchthingasamendmentbywaivernosuchthingasamendmentbyacquiescenceandnosuchthingasamendmentbyanyothermeanswhatsoeverexceptthemeansspecifiedinArticleVoftheConstitutionitself.Itdoesnotsufficetosaythattherehavebeenhundredsofcasesdecidedunderthe14thAmendmenttosupplytheconstitutionaldeficienciesinitsproposalorratificationasrequiredbyArticleV.Ifhundredsoflitigantsdidnotquestionthevalidityofthe14thAmendment,orquestionedthesameperfunctorilywithoutsubmittingdocumentaryproofofthefactsofrecordwhichmadeitspurportedadoptionunconstitutional,theirfailurecannotchangetheConstitutionforthemillionsinAmerica.Thesamethingistrueoflachesthesamethingistrueofacquiescencethesamethingistrueofillconsideredcourtdecisions.ToascribeconstitutionallifetoanallegedamendmentwhichnevercameintobeingaccordingtospecificmethodslaiddowninArticleVcannotbedonewithoutdoingviolencetoArticleVitself.Thisistruebecausetheonlyquestionopentothecourtsiswhetherthealleged14thAmendmentbecameapartoftheConstitutionthroughamethodrequiredbyArticleV.Anythingbeyondthatwhichacourtiscalledupontoholdinordertovalidateanamendment,wouldbeequivalenttowritingintoArticleVanothermodeofamendmentwhichhasneverbeenauthorizedbythepeopleoftheUnitedStates.Onthispoint,therefore,thequestionis,wasthe14thAmendmentproposedandratifiedinaccordancewithArticleV?Inansweringthisquestion,itisofnorealmomentthatdecisionshavebeenrenderedinwhichthepartiesdidnotcontestorsubmitproperevidence,ortheCourtassumedthattherewasa14thAmendment.IfastatuteneverinfactpassedbyCongress,throughsomeerrorofadministrationandprintinggotintothepublishedreportsofthestatutes,andifundersuchsupposedstatutecourtshadleviedpunishmentuponanumberofpersonschargedunderit,andiftheerrorinthepublishedvolumewasdiscoveredandthefactbecameknownthatnosuchstatutehadeverpassedinCongress,itisunthinkablethattheCourtswouldcontinuetoadministerpunishmentinsimilarcases,onanonexistentstatutebecausepriordecisionshaddoneso.Ifthatbetrueastoastatuteweneed

onlyrealizethegreatertruthwhentheprincipleisappliedtothesolemnquestionofthecontentsoftheConstitution.Whilethedefectsinthemethodofproposingandthesubsequentmethodofcomputing"ratification"isbriefedelsewhere,itshouldbenotedthatthefailuretocomplywithArticleVbeganwiththefirstactionbyCongress.TheveryCongresswhichproposedthealleged14thamendmentunderthefirstpartofArticleVwasitself,atthatverytime,violatingthelastpartaswellasthefirstpartofArticleVoftheConstitution.Weshallseehowthiswasdone.Thereisone,andonlyone,provisionoftheConstitutionoftheUnitedStateswhichisforeverimmutablewhichcanneverbechangedorexpunged.TheCourtscannotalterittheexecutivescannotchangeittheCongresscannotchangeittheStatesthemselvesevenalltheStatesinperfectconcertcannotamenditinanymannerwhatsoever,whethertheyactthroughconventionscalledforthepurposeorthroughtheirlegislatures.NoteventheunanimousvoteofeveryvoterintheUnitedStatescouldamendthisprovision.ItisaperpetualfixtureintheConstitution,soperpetualandsofixedthatifthepeopleoftheUnitedStatesdesiredtochangeorexcludeit,theywouldbecompelledtoabolishtheConstitutionandstartafresh.Theunalterableprovisionisthis..."thatnoState,withoutitsconsent,shallbedeprivedofitsequalsuffrageintheSenate."Astate,byitsownconsent,maywaivethisrightofequalsuffrage,butthatistheonlylegalmethodbywhichafailuretoaccordthisimmutablerightofequalsuffrageintheSenatecanbejustified.CertainlynotbyforcibleejectionanddenialbyamajorityinCongress,aswasdonefortheadoptionoftheJointResolutionforthe14thAmendment.StatementsbytheCourtintheColemancasethatCongresswasleftincompletecontrolofthemandatoryprocess,andthereforeitwasapoliticalaffairforCongresstodecideifanamendmenthadbeenratified,doesnotsquarewithArticleVoftheConstitutionwhichshowsnointentiontoleaveCongressinchargeofdecidingwhethertherehasbeenaratification.EvenaconstitutionallyrecognizedCongressisgivenbutonevolitioninarticleV,thatis,tovotewhethertoproposeanAmendmentonitsowninitiative.TheremainingstepsbyCongressaremandatory.Iftwothirdsofbothhousesshalldeemitnecessary,CongressshallproposeamendmentsiftheLegislaturesoftwothirdsoftheStatesmakeapplication,Congressshallcallaconvention.FortheCourttogiveCongressanypowerbeyondthattobefoundinArticleVistowritethenewmaterialintoArticleV.ItwouldbeinconceivablethattheCongressoftheUnitedStatescouldpropose,compelsubmissionto,andthengivelifetoaninvalidamendmentbyresolvingthatitsefforthadsucceeded,regardlessofcompliancewiththepositiveprovisionsofArticleV.ItshouldneednofurthercitationstosustainthepropositionthatneithertheJointResolutionproposingthe14thamendmentnoritsratificationbytherequiredthreefourthsoftheStatesintheUnionwereincompliancewiththerequirementsofArticleVoftheConstitution.WhenthemandatoryprovisionsoftheConstitutionareviolated,theConstitutionitselfstrikeswithnullitytheActthatdidviolencetoitsprovisions.Thus,theConstitutionstrikeswithnullitythepurported14thAmendment.TheCourts,boundbyoathtosupporttheConstitution,shouldreviewalloftheevidencehereinsubmittedandmeasurethefactsprovingviolationsofthemandatoryprovisionsoftheConstitutionwithArticleV,andfinallyrenderjudgmentdeclaringsaidpurportedamendmentnevertohavebeenadoptedasrequiredbytheConstitution.

TheConstitutionmakesitthesworndutyofthejudgestoupholdtheConstitutionwhichstrikeswithnullitythe14thAmendment.And,asChiefJusticeMarshallpointedoutforaunanimousCourtinMarburyv.Madison(1Cranch136at179):"Theframersoftheconstitutioncontemplatedtheinstrumentasaruleforthegovernmentofcourts,aswellasofthelegislature.""WhydoesajudgesweartodischargehisdutiesagreeablytotheconstitutionoftheUnitedStates,ifthatconstitutionformsnoruleforhisgovernment?""Ifsuchbetherealstateofthings,thatisworsethansolemnmockery.Toprescribe,ortotakethisoath,becomesequallyacrime.""Thus,theparticularphraseologyoftheConstitutionoftheUnitedStatesconfirmsandstrengthenstheprinciple,supposedtobeessentialtoallwrittenconstitutions,courts,aswellasotherdepartments,areboundbythatinstrument."Thefederalcourtsactuallyrefusetohearargumentontheinvalidityofthe14thAmendment,evenwhentheissueispresentedsquarelybythepleadingsandtheevidenceasabove.OnlyanarousedpublicsentimentinfavorofpreservingtheConstitutionandourinstitutionsandfreedomsunderconstitutionalgovernment,andthefuturesecurityofourcountry,willbreakthepoliticalbarrierwhichnowpreventsjudicialconsiderationoftheunconstitutionalityofthe14thAmendment.TheabovetreatiseistakeninpartfromtheresearchofJudgeL.H.Perez.

FurthernotesandaddendaItmustbenotedthattheResolutionproposingthetwelvesectionswhichcomprisetheBillofRightswasnotissuedtotheStateswithasignature,norwerenos.11,12,ortheoriginal13th.Theproposed"Corwin"13thof1861legalizingSlaveryandacknowledgingStatesrights,signedasapprovedbyBuchanantwodaysbeforeLincolnsinauguration,andtheAntiSlaveryAmendment,signedbythenPresidentLincolnweretheonlytwosignedbypresidents.SoPresidentAndrewJohnsonsargumentwasprobablydefective.Itmaybehelpfultoknowthatthe14thamendmentproclamationsofJuly20,1868,note51,andJuly28,1868,note53,wereissuedasPresidentialExecutiveOrders.PresidentialExecutiveOrderNo.6,issuedJuly20,1868:Ratificationofthe14thAmendmentcertifiedasvalid,providedtheconsentofOhioandNewJerseybedeemedasremaininginforcedespitesubsequentwithdrawal,signedbyWilliamH.Seward,SecretaryofState,hastheformofaproclamation.PresidentialExecutiveOrderNo.7,issuedJuly28,1868:14thAmendmentcertifiedasineffectandorderedpublished,signedbyWilliamH.Seward,SecretaryofState.TheforegoingisfromPresidentialExecutiveOrderTitleListPresidentialExecutiveOrders,twovolumes(N.Y.:Books,Inc.,1944CopyrightbyMayorofN.Y.1944),vol.1,pp.12.Inthislightthe14th(amendment),whichhasperplexedmany,isanExecutiveOrder,notan(Articleof)AmendmenttotheConstitutionoftheunitedStatesofAmerica,albeitastatuteandsoremainsanExecutiveOrder.Whatreallycountsarethesepoints:

NewJerseywasdisenfranchisedintheSenatebyhavingitslawfullyelectedSenatoraccepted,andthenrejected,andwithoutatwothirdsvote

OregonsfaultyratificationvotewithunlawfulstatelegislatorsbeingallowedtocastvotesandthelawfullyconstitutedstatelegislaturethenrejectingtheFourteenth,buttoolate.

Nonrepublican(Reconstruction)governmentsofthesouthernStatesimposedbymilitaryforceandfiat,cannotratifyanything.EithertheFourteenthislegalandtheantislaveryamendmentisnot,ortheantislaveryamendmentislegalandtheFourteenthisnot.