Theunconstitutional14thAmendmentPart1of4

Introduction
ThistreatiseontheunconstitutionalityoftheFourteenthAmendmentisbaseduponthemost
comprehensiveresearchanddocumentationofeveryangleconcerningtheunlawfulprocedures
involvedinitspurportedadoption.
Thisworkwasdoneandisofferedwitharealizationthatthefederalcourtsarenotreadytogive
considerationtothesubject,becausetheU.S.SupremeCourtandinferiorcourtshaveusedthe14th
Amendmenttoenlargeupontheirungrantedpowerswithoutlimitorreserve.
Socialistorganizedanddirectedviolentmassdemonstrationsandarmedrebellioninthenations
capitalandinmanyAmericancitiesareextortingfromCongressmoreandmoreradicallegislation.
These"laws"threatenbasicpersonalfreedom,privatepropertyrightsandencroachuponanddestroy
moreandmoretheconstitutionalrightofselfgovernmentbythepeopleonstateandlocallevels.
Executiveordersextendtowardfurtherfederalcontrolofeveryaspectoflifeinthenation,eitherby
shuttingofffederalfundstothosewhowillnotsubscribetotheirforceddictumsorbycourtinjunctive
orderstothesameeffect.
Thereliesthegreatestdangertoourcountrysfuture:sothattheendresultinthenextorsucceeding
generationcanonlybeadeterioratedindustrialempireandaweakenednationaldefense,whichmust
resultinabjectsurrendertoourmortalenemyworldwidesocialismandtotalitarianism.Thatisthe
ultimateendofthesubversiveuseoftheunconstitutional14thAmendment.
Itishopedthatthistreatise,exposingtheabsoluteunconstitutionalityofthel4thAmendment,willbe
givensufficientgeneralcirculationandpublicitytoawakena"consensus"ofpublicsentimenttoreach
theseatsofpowerinWashington,D.C.,sothatultimatelythestampofunconstitutionalitymaybe
placeduponthe14thAmendment,andconstitutionalgovernmentandnationalsanityoncemoremay
prevail.
CitesandReferences:
CongressionalRecord
Senate,84thCon.1stSession.,Vol.101,pp.7119to7124
Senate,86thCon.,2ndSession.,Vol.106,pp.4036to4038
Senate,89thCon.,1stSession.,Vol.III,pp.10669to10671.

The14thAmendmentisunconstitutional
Thepurported14thAmendmenttotheUnitedStatesConstitutionisandshouldbeheldtobe
ineffective,invalid,null,voidandunconstitutionalforthefollowingreasons:
TheJointResolutionproposingsaidamendmentwasnotsubmittedtooradoptedbya
ConstitutionalCongressperArticleI,Section3,andArticleVoftheU.S.Constitution.
TheJointResolutionwasnotsubmittedtothePresidentforhisapprovalasrequiredbyArticle
I,Section7oftheConstitution.
Theproposed14thAmendmentwasrejectedbymorethanonefourthofalltheStatesthenin
theUnion,anditwasneverratifiedbythreefourthsofalltheStatesintheUnionasrequired
byArticleVoftheU.S.Constitution.

TheunconstitutionalCongress
TheU.S.ConstitutionprovidesinArticleI,Section3:"TheSenateoftheUnitedStatesshallbe
composedoftwoSenatorsfromeachState."

ArticleVprovides:"NoState,withoutitsconsent,shallbedeprivedofitsequalsuffrageinthe
Senate."
Thefactthat28SenatorshadbeenunlawfullyexcludedfromtheU.S.Senate,inordertosecurea
twothirdsvoteforadoptionoftheJointResolutionproposingthe14thAmendmentisshownby
ResolutionsofprotestadoptedbythefollowingStateLegislatures.
TheNewJerseyLegislature,byResolutionofMarch27,1868,protestedasfollows:
"Thesaidproposedamendmentnothavingyetreceivedtheassentthethreefourthsofthestates,
whichisnecessarytomakeitvalid,thenaturalandconstitutionalrightofthisstatetowithdrawits
assentisundeniable.
"Thatitbeingnecessarybytheconstitutionthateveryamendmenttothesameshouldbeproposed
bytwothirdsofbothhousesofcongress,theauthorsofsaidproposition,forthepurposeofsecuring
theassentoftherequisitemajority,determinedto,anddid,excludefromthesaidtwohouseseighty
representativesfromelevenstatesoftheunion,uponthepretencethattherewerenosuchstatesin
theUnion:but,findingthattwothirdsoftheremainderofthesaidhousescouldnotbebroughtto
assenttothesaidproposition,theydeliberatelyformedandcarriedoutthedesignofmutilatingthe
integrityoftheUnitedStatessenate,andwithoutanypretextorjustification,otherthanthe
possessionofthepower,withouttheright,andinpalpableviolationoftheconstitution,ejecteda
memberoftheirownbody,representingthisstate,andthuspracticallydeniedtoNewJerseyitsequal
1
suffrageinthesenate,andtherebynominallysecuredthevoteoftwothirdsofthesaidhouses."
TheAlabamaLegislatureprotestedagainstbeingdeprivedofrepresentationintheSenateoftheU.S.
2
Congress.
TheTexasLegislaturebyResolutiononOctober15,1866,protestedasfollows:
"TheamendmenttotheConstitutionproposedbythisjointresolutionasarticleXIVispresentedtothe
LegislatureofTexasforitsactionthereon,underArticleVofthatConstitution.ThisarticleV,
providingthemodeofmakingamendmentstothatinstrument,contemplatestheparticipationbyall
theStatesthroughtheirrepresentativesinCongress,inproposingamendments.Asrepresentatives
fromnearlyonethirdoftheStateswereexcludedfromtheCongressproposingtheamendments,the
constitutionalrequirementwasnotcompliedwithitwasviolatedinletterandinspiritandthe
proposingoftheseamendmentstoStateswhichwereexcludedfromallparticipationintheirinitiation
3
inCongress,isanullity."
TheArkansasLegislature,byResolutiononDecember17,1866,protestedasfollows:
"TheConstitutionauthorizedtwothirdsofbothhousesofCongresstoproposeamendmentsand,as
elevenStateswereexcludedfromdeliberationanddecisionupontheonenowsubmitted,the
conclusionisinevitablethatitisnotproposedbylegalauthority,butinpalpableviolationofthe
4
Constitution."
TheGeorgiaLegislature,byResolutiononNovember9,1866,protestedasfollows:
"SincethereorganizationoftheStategovernment,GeorgiahaselectedSenatorsand
Representatives.SohaseveryotherState.Theyhavebeenarbitrarilyrefusedadmissiontotheir
seats,notonthegroundthatthequalificationsofthememberselecteddidnotconformtothefourth
paragraph,secondsection,firstarticleoftheConstitution,butbecausetheirrightofrepresentation
wasdeniedbyaportionoftheStateshavingequalbutnotgreaterrightsthanthemselves.Theyhave
infactbeenforciblyexcludedand,inasmuchasalllegislativepowergrantedbytheStatestothe
Congressisdefined,andthispowerofexclusionisnotamongthepowersexpresslyorbyimplication,

theassemblage,atthecapitol,ofrepresentativesfromaportionoftheStates,totheexclusionofthe
representativesofanotherportion,cannotbeaconstitutionalCongress,whentherepresentationof
eachStateformsanintegralpartofthewhole.
"ThisamendmentistenderedtoGeorgiaforratification,underthatpowerintheConstitutionwhich
authorizestwothirdsoftheCongresstoproposeamendments.Wehaveendeavoredtoestablishthat
Georgiahadaright,inthefirstplace,asapartoftheCongress,toactuponthequestion,Shallthese
amendmentsbeproposed?EveryotherexcludedStatehadthesameright.
"Thefirstconstitutionalprivilegehasbeenarbitrarilydenied.
"HadtheseamendmentsbeensubmittedtoaconstitutionalCongress,theyneverwouldhavebeen
proposedtotheStates.TwothirdsofthewholeCongressneverwouldhaveproposedtoeleven
StatesvoluntarilytoreducetheirpoliticalpowerintheUnion,andatthesametime,disfranchisethe
5
largerportionoftheintellect,integrityandpatriotismofelevencoequalStates."
TheFloridaLegislature,byResolutionofDecember5,1866,protestedasfollows:
"Letthisalterationbemadeintheorganicsystemandsomenewandmorestartlingdemandsmayor
maynotberequiredbythepredominantpartyprevioustoallottingthetenStatesnowunlawfullyand
unconstitutionallydeprivedoftheirrightofrepresentationtoentertheHallsoftheNational
Legislature.TheirrighttorepresentationisguaranteedbytheConstitutionofthiscountryandthereis
6
noact,noteventhatofrebellion,candeprivethemofitsexercise."
TheSouthCarolinaLegislaturebyResolutionofNovember27,1866,protestedasfollows:
"ElevenoftheSouthernStates,includingSouthCarolina,aredeprivedoftheirrepresentationin
Congress.AlthoughtheirSenatorsandRepresentativeshavebeendulyelectedandhavepresented
themselvesforthepurposeoftakingtheirseats,theircredentialshave,inmostinstances,beenlaid
uponthetablewithoutbeingread,orhavebeenreferredtoacommittee,whohavefailedtomake
anyreportonthesubject.Inshort,CongresshasrefusedtoexerciseitsConstitutionalfunctions,and
decideeitherupontheelection,thereturn,orthequalificationoftheseselectedbytheStatesand
peopletorepresentus.SomeoftheSenatorsandRepresentativesfromtheSouthernStateswere
preparedtotakethetestoath,buteventhesehavebeenpersistentlyignored,andkeptoutofthe
seatstowhichtheywereentitledundertheConstitutionandlaws.
"HencethisamendmenthasnotbeenproposedbytwothirdsofbothHousesofalegallyconstituted
7
Congress,andisnot,Constitutionallyorlegitimately,beforeasingleLegislatureforratification."
TheNorthCarolinaLegislatureprotestedbyResolutionofDecember6,1866asfollows:
"TheFederalConstitutiondeclares,insubstance,thatCongressshallconsistofaHouseof
Representatives,composedofmembersapportionedamongtherespectiveStatesintheratiooftheir
population,andofaSenate,composedoftwomembersfromeachState.AndintheArticlewhich
concernsAmendments,itisexpresslyprovidedthatnoState,withoutitsconsent,shallbedeprived
ofitsequalsuffrageintheSenate.ThecontemplatedAmendmentwasnotproposedtotheStatesby
aCongressthusconstituted.Atthetimeofitsadoption,theelevensecedingStatesweredeprivedof
representationbothintheSenateandHouse,althoughtheyall,excepttheStateofTexas,had
SenatorsandRepresentativesdulyelectedandclaimingtheirprivilegesundertheConstitution.In
consequenceofthis,theseStateshadnovoiceontheimportantquestionofproposingthe
Amendment.Hadtheybeenallowedtogivetheirvotes,thepropositionwoulddoubtlesshavefailed
tocommandtherequiredtwothirdsmajority.

"IfthevotesoftheseStatesarenecessarytoavalidratificationoftheAmendment,theywereequally
necessaryonthequestionofproposingittotheStatesforitwouldbedifficult,intheopinionofthe
Committee,toshowbywhatprocessinlogic,menofintelligencecouldarriveatadifferent
8
conclusion."
Jointresolutionineffective
ArticleI,Section7oftheUnitedStatesConstitutionprovidesthatnotonlyeverybillwhichshallhave
beenpassedbytheHouseofRepresentativesandtheSenateoftheUnitedStatesCongress,but
that:
"EveryOrder,Resolution,orVotetowhichtheConcurrenceoftheSenateandHouseof
Representativesmaybenecessary(exceptonaquestionofAdjournment)shallbepresentedtothe
PresidentoftheUnitedStatesandbeforetheSameshalltakeEffect,shallbeapprovedbyhim,or
beingdisapprovedbyhimshallberepassedbytwothirdsoftheSenateandHouseof
Representatives,accordingtotheRulesandLimitationsprescribedintheCaseofaBill."
9
TheJointResolutionproposingthe14thAmendment
wasneverpresentedtothePresidentofthe
UnitedStatesforhisapproval,asPresidentAndrewJohnsonstatedinhismessageonJune22,
10
1866.
Therefore,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.

Theunconstitutional14thAmendmentPart2of4
Therewasneitheraquoruminthefirstplace,norwasitratifiedby
threefourthsofthestates.
1.Pretermittingtheineffectivenessofsaidresolution,asalreadyshown,fifteen(15)Statesoutofthe
thenthirtyseven(37)StatesoftheUnionrejectedtheproposed14thAmendmentbetweenthedate
ofitssubmissiontotheStatesbytheSecretaryofStateonJune16,1866andMarch24,1868,
therebyfurthernullifyingsaidresolutionandmakingitimpossibleforitsratificationbythe
constitutionallyrequiredthreefourthsofsuchStates,asshownintherejectionsthereofbythe
Legislaturesofthefollowingstates:
11
Texasrejectedthe14thAmendmentonOct.27,1866.
12
Georgiarejectedthe14thAmendmentonNov.9,1866.
13
Floridarejectedthe14thAmendmentonDec.6,1866.
14
Alabamarejectedthe14thAmendmentonDec.7,1866.
15
NorthCarolinarejectedthe14thAmendmentonDec.14,1866.

16
Arkansasrejectedthe14thAmendmentonDec.17,1866.
17
SouthCarolinarejectedthe14thAmendmentonDec.20,1866.
18
Kentuckyrejectedthe14thAmendmentonJan.8,1867.
19
Virginiarejectedthe14thAmendmentonJan.9,1867.
20
Louisianarejectedthe14thAmendmentonFeb.6,1867.
21
Delawarerejectedthe14thAmendmentonFeb.7,1867.
22
Marylandrejectedthel4thAmendmentonMar.23,1867.
23
Mississippirejectedthe14thAmendmentonJan.31,1867.
24
Ohiorejectedthe14thAmendmentonJan.16,1868.
25
NewJerseyrejectedthe14thAmendmentonMar.24,1868.
TherewasnoquestionthatalloftheSouthernstateswhichrejectedthe14thAmendmenthadlegally
constitutedgovernments,werefullyrecognizedbythefederalgovernment,andwerefunctioningas
memberstatesoftheUnionatthetimeoftheirrejection.
26
PresidentAndrewJohnson,inhisVetomessageofMarch2,1867,
pointedoutthat:
"ItisnotdeniedthattheStatesinquestionhaveeachofthemanactualgovernmentwithallthe
powers,executive,judicialandlegislative,whichproperlybelongtoafreeState.Theyareorganized
liketheotherStatesoftheUnion,and,likethemtheymake,administer,andexecutethelawswhich
concerntheirdomesticaffairs."
IffurtherproofwereneededthattheseStateswereoperatingunderlegallyconstitutedgovernments
asmemberStatesintheUnion,theratificationofthe13thAmendmentbyDecember8,1865
undoubtedlysuppliesthisofficialproof.IftheSouthernStateswerenotmemberStatesoftheUnion,
the13thamendmentwouldnothavebeensubmittedtotheirLegislaturesforratification.
2.The13thAmendmenttotheUnitedStatesConstitutionwasproposedbyJointResolutionof
27
Congress
andwasapprovedFebruary1,1865byPresidentAbrahamLincoln,asrequiredbyArticle
I,Section7oftheUnitedStatesConstitution.ThePresidentssignatureisaffixedtotheResolution.
The13thAmendmentwasratifiedby27statesofthethen36statesoftheUnion,includingthe
SouthernStatesofVirginia,Louisiana,Arkansas,SouthCarolina,Alabama,NorthCarolinaand
28
Georgia.ThisisshownbytheProclamationoftheSecretaryofStateDecember18,1865.
Without
thevotesofthesesevenSouthernStateLegislaturesthe13thAmendmentwouldhavefailed.There
canbenodoubtbutthattheratificationbytheseSouthernStatesofthe13thAmendmentagain
establishedthefactthattheirLegislaturesandStategovernmentsweredulyandlawfullyconstituted
andfunctioningassuchundertheirStateConstitutions.
3.Furthermore,onApril2,1866,PresidentAndrewJohnsonissuedaproclamationthat,
"theinsurrectionwhichheretoforeexistedintheStatesofGeorgia,SouthCarolina,Virginia,North
Carolina,Tennessee,Alabama,Louisiana,Arkansas,MississippiandFloridaisatanend,andis
29
henceforthtobesoregarded."
30
OnAugust20,1866,PresidentAndrewJohnsonissuedanotherproclamation
pointingoutthefact
31
thattheHouseofRepresentativesandSenatehadadoptedidenticalResolutionsonJuly22nd
and
32
July26th,1861,thattheCivilWarforcedbydisunionistsoftheSouthernStates,wasnotwagedfor
thepurposeofconquestortooverthrowtherightsandestablishedinstitutionsofthoseStates,butto
defendandmaintainthesupremacyoftheConstitutionandtopreservetheUnionwithallequality
andrightsoftheseveralstatesunimpaired,andthatassoonastheseobjectswereaccomplished,
thewaroughttocease.ThePresidentsproclamationonJune13,1866,declaredtheinsurrectionin

33
34
theStateofTennesseehadbeensuppressed.
ThePresidentsproclamationonApril2,1866,

declaredtheinsurrectionintheotherSouthernStates,exceptTexas,nolongerexisted.OnAugust
35
20,1866,
thePresidentproclaimedthattheinsurrectionintheStateofTexashadbeencompletely
endedandhisproclamationcontinued:
"theinsurrectionwhichheretoforeexistedintheStateofTexasisatanend,andistobehenceforth
soregardedinthatState,asintheotherStatesbeforenamedinwhichthesaidinsurrectionwas
proclaimedtobeatanendbytheaforesaidproclamationoftheseconddayofApril,onethousand,
eighthundredandsixtysix.
"AndIdofurtherproclaimthatthesaidinsurrectionisatanend,andthatpeace,order,tranquillity,
andcivilauthoritynowexist,inandthroughoutthewholeoftheUnitedStatesofAmerica."
4.WhentheStateofLouisianarejectedthe14thAmendmentonFebruary6,1867,makingthe10th
statetohaverejectedthesame,ormorethanonefourthofthetotalnumberof36statesoftheUnion
asofthatdate,thusleavinglessthanthreefourthsofthestatespossiblytoratifythesame,the
Amendmentfailedofratificationinfactandinlaw,anditcouldnothavebeenrevivedexceptbya
newJointResolutionoftheSenateandHouseofRepresentativesinaccordancewithConstitutional
requirement.
5.Facedwiththepositivefailureofratificationofthe14thAmendment,bothHousesofCongress
passedoverthevetoofthePresidentthreeActsknownasReconstructionActs,betweenthedatesof
March2andJuly19,1867,especiallythethirdofsaidActs,15Stat.p.14etc.,designedillegallyto
removewith"Militaryforce"thelawfullyconstitutedStateLegislaturesofthetenSouthernStatesof
Virginia,NorthCarolina,SouthCarolina,Georgia,Florida,Alabama,Mississippi,Arkansas,Louisiana
andTexas.InPresidentAndrewJohnsonsVetomessageontheReconstructionActofMarch2,
36
1867,
hepointedouttheseunconstitutionalities:
"IfevertheAmericancitizenshouldbelefttothefreeexerciseofhisownjudgment,itiswhenheis
engagedintheworkofformingthefundamentallawunderwhichheistolive.Thatworkishiswork,
anditcannotproperlybetakenoutofhishands.Allthislegislationproceedsuponthecontrary
assumptionthatthepeopleofeachoftheseStatesshallhavenoconstitution,exceptsuchasmaybe
arbitrarilydictatedbyCongress,andformedundertherestraintofmilitaryrule.Aplainstatementof
factsmakesthisevident.
"InalltheseStatesthereareexistingconstitutions,framedintheaccustomedwaybythepeople.
Congress,however,declaresthattheseconstitutionsarenotloyalandrepublican,andrequiresthe
peopletoformthemanew.What,then,intheopinionofCongress,isnecessarytomakethe
constitutionofaStateloyalandrepublican?Theoriginalactanswersthequestion:Itisuniversal
negrosuffrage,aquestionwhichthefederalConstitutionleavesexclusivelytotheStatesthemselves.
Allthislegislativemachineryofmartiallaw,militarycoercion,andpoliticaldisfranchisementis
avowedlyforthatpurposeandnoneother.TheexistingconstitutionsofthetenStatesconformtothe
acknowledgedstandardsofloyaltyandrepublicanism.Indeed,iftherearedegreesinrepublican
formsofgovernment,theirconstitutionsaremorerepublicannow,thanwhentheseStatesfourof
whichweremembersoftheoriginalthirteenfirstbecamemembersoftheUnion."
InPresidentAndrewJohnsonsVetomessageontheReconstructionActonJuly19,1867,he
pointedoutvariousunconstitutionalitiesasfollows:

"Thevetooftheoriginalbillofthe2dofMarchwasbasedontwodistinctgrounds,theinterferenceof
CongressinmattersstrictlyappertainingtothereservedpowersoftheStates,andtheestablishment
ofmilitarytribunalsforthetrialofcitizensintimeofpeace.
"Asingularcontradictionisapparenthere.CongressdeclarestheselocalStategovernmentstobe
illegalgovernments,andthenprovidesthattheseillegalgovernmentsshallbecarriedonbyfederal
officers,whoaretoperformtheverydutiesonitsownofficersbythisillegalStateauthority.It
certainlywouldbeanovelspectacleifCongressshouldattempttocarryonalegalStategovernment
bytheagencyofitsownofficers.ItisyetmorestrangethatCongressattemptstosustainandcarry
onanillegalStategovernmentbythesamefederalagency.
"ItisnowtoolatetosaythatthesetenpoliticalcommunitiesarenotStatesofthisUnion.Declarations
tothecontrarymadeinthesethreeactsarecontradictedagainandagainbyrepeatedactsof
legislationenactedbyCongressfromtheyear1861totheyear1867.
"Duringthatperiod,whiletheseStateswereinactualrebellion,andafterthatrebellionwasbroughtto
aclose,theyhavebeenagainandagainrecognizedasStatesoftheUnion.Representationhasbeen
apportionedtothemasStates.Theyhavebeendividedintojudicialdistrictsfortheholdingofdistrict
andcircuitcourtsoftheUnitedStates,asStatesoftheUniononlycanbedistricted.Thelastacton
thissubjectwaspassedJuly28,1866,bywhicheveryoneofthesetenStateswasarrangedinto
districtsandcircuits.
"TheyhavebeencalleduponbyCongresstoactthroughtheirlegislaturesuponatleasttwo
amendmentstotheConstitutionoftheUnitedStates.AsStatestheyhaveratifiedoneamendment,
whichrequiredthevoteoftwentysevenStatesofthethirtysixthencomposingtheUnion.Whenthe
requisitetwentysevenvotesweregiveninfavorofthatamendmentsevenofwhichvoteswere
givenbysevenofthesetenStatesitwasproclaimedtobeapartoftheConstitutionoftheUnited
States,andslaverywasdeclarednolongertoexistwithintheUnitedStatesoranyplacesubjectto
theirjurisdiction.IfthesesevenStateswerenotlegalStatesoftheUnion,itfollowsasaninevitable
consequencethatinsomeoftheStatesslaveryyetexists.ItdoesnotexistinthesesevenStates,for
theyhaveabolisheditalsointheirStateconstitutionsbutKentuckynothavingdoneso,itwouldstill
remaininthatState.But,intruth,ifthisassumptionthattheseStateshavenolegalState
governmentsbetrue,thentheabolitionofslaverybytheseillegalgovernmentsbindsnoone,for
CongressnowdeniestotheseStatesthepowertoabolishslaverybydenyingtothemthepowerto
electalegalStatelegislature,ortoframeaconstitutionforanypurpose,evenforsuchapurposeas
theabolitionofslavery.
"Astotheotherconstitutionalamendmenthavingreferencetosuffrage,ithappensthattheseStates
havenotacceptedit.Theconsequenceis,thatithasneverbeenproclaimedorunderstood,evenby
Congress,tobeapartoftheConstitutionoftheUnitedStates.TheSenateoftheUnitedStateshas
repeatedlygivenitssanctiontotheappointmentofjudges,districtattorneys,andmarshalsforevery
oneoftheseStatesyet,iftheyarenotlegalStates,notoneofthesejudgesisauthorizedtoholda
court.So,too,bothhousesofCongresshavepassedappropriationbillstopayallthesejudges,
attorneys,andofficersoftheUnitedStatesforexercisingtheirfunctionsintheseStates.
"Again,inthemachineryoftheinternalrevenuelaws,alltheseStatesaredistricted,notas
Territories,butasStates.

"Somuchforcontinuouslegislativerecognition.Theinstancescited,however,fallfarshortofallthat
mightbeenumerated.Executiverecognition,asiswellknown,hasbeenfrequentandunwavering.
ThesamemaybesaidastojudicialrecognitionthroughtheSupremeCourtoftheUnitedStates.
"Tometheseconsiderationsareconclusiveoftheunconstitutionalityofthispartofthebillnowbefore
me,andIearnestlycommendtheirconsiderationtothedeliberatejudgmentofCongress.
"WithinaperiodlessthanayearthelegislationofCongresshasattemptedtostriptheexecutive
departmentofthegovernmentofsomeofitsessentialpowers.TheConstitution,andtheoath
providedinit,devolveuponthePresidentthepoweranddutytoseethatthelawsarefaithfully
executed.TheConstitution,inordertocarryoutthispower,giveshimthechoiceoftheagents,and
makesthemsubjecttohiscontrolandsupervision.Butintheexecutionoftheselawsthe
constitutionalobligationuponthePresidentremains,butthepowerstoexercisethatconstitutional
dutyiseffectuallytakenaway.Themilitarycommanderis,astothepowerofappointment,madeto
taketheplaceofitsPresident,andtheGeneraloftheArmytheplaceoftheSenateandanyattempt
onthepartofthePresidenttoasserthisownconstitutionalpowermay,underpretenceoflaw,bemet
byofficialinsubordination.Itistobefearedthatthesemilitaryofficers,lookingtotheauthoritygiven
bytheselawsratherthantotheletteroftheConstitution,willrecognizenoauthoritybutthe
commanderofthedistrictandtheGeneralofthearmy.
"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.,NationalArchivesand
RecordsService.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.

Theunconstitutional14thAmendmentPart3of4
SpreadingLincolniandemocracy
PresidentAndrewJohnsonendedhisvetomessageregardingtheReconstructionActonJuly19,
1867asfollows:
"[I]ntheexecutionoftheselawstheconstitutionalobligationuponthePresidentremains,butthe
powerstoexercisethatconstitutionaldutyiseffectuallytakenaway.Themilitarycommanderis,asto
thepowerofappointment,madetotaketheplaceofitsPresident,andtheGeneraloftheArmythe
placeoftheSenateandanyattemptonthepartofthePresidenttoasserthisownconstitutional
powermay,underpretenceoflaw,bemetbyofficialinsubordination.Itistobefearedthatthese
militaryofficers,lookingtotheauthoritygivenbytheselawsratherthantotheletterofthe
Constitution,willrecognizenoauthoritybutthecommanderofthedistrictandtheGeneralofthe
army.
"Iftherewerenootherobjectionthanthistothisproposedlegislation,itwouldbesufficient."

NoonecancontendthattheReconstructionActswereeverupheldasbeing
validandconstitutional.
Theywerebroughtintoquestion,buttheCourtseitheravoideddecisionorwerepreventedby
Congressfromfinallyadjudicatingupontheirconstitutionality.
InMississippiv.PresidentAndrewJohnson,(4Wall.475502),wherethesuitsoughttoenjointhe
PresidentoftheUnitedStatesfromenforcingprovisionsoftheReconstructionActs,theU.S.
SupremeCourtheldthatthePresidentcannotbeenjoinedbecausefortheJudicialDepartmentofthe
governmenttoattempttoenforcetheperformanceofthedutiesbythePresidentmightbejustly
characterized,inthelanguageofChiefJusticeMarshall,as"anabsurdandexcessiveextravagance."
TheCourtfurthersaidthatiftheCourtgrantedtheinjunctionagainstenforcementofthe
ReconstructionActs,andifthePresidentrefusedobedience,itisneedlesstoobservethattheCourt
iswithoutpowertoenforceitsprocess.

AndnowtotheCourt
Inajointaction,thestatesofGeorgiaandMississippibroughtsuitagainstthePresidentandthe
SecretaryofWar,(6Wall.5078,154U.S.554).
TheCourtsaidthat:
"ThebillthensetsforththattheintentanddesignoftheactsofCongress,asapparentontheirface
andbytheirterms,aretooverthrowandannulthisexistingstategovernment,andtoerectanother
anddifferentgovernmentinitsplace,unauthorizedbytheConstitutionandindefianceofits
guarantiesandthat,infurtheranceofthisintentanddesign,thedefendants,theSecretaryofWar,
theGeneraloftheArmy,andMajorGeneralPope,actingunderordersofthePresident,areabout
settinginmotionaportionofthearmytotakemilitarypossessionofthestate,andthreatentosubvert
hergovernmentandsubjectherpeopletomilitaryrulethatthestateisholdinginadequatemeansto
resistthepowerandforceoftheExecutiveDepartmentoftheUnitedStatesandshethereforeinsists
thatsuchprotectioncan,andoughttobeaffordedbyadecreeororderofthiscourtinthepremises."
TheapplicationsforinjunctionbythesetwostatestoprohibittheExecutiveDepartmentfromcarrying
outtheprovisionsoftheReconstructionActsdirectedtotheoverthrowoftheirgovernment,including
thedissolutionoftheirstatelegislatures,weredeniedonthegroundsthattheorganizationofthe
governmentintothreegreatdepartments,theexecutive,legislativeandjudicial,carriedlimitationsof

thepowersofeachbytheConstitution.Thiscasewentthesamewayasthepreviouscaseof
MississippiagainstPresidentJohnsonandwasdismissedwithoutadjudicationuponthe
constitutionalityoftheReconstructionActs.
Inanothercase,exparteWilliamH.McCardle(7Wall.506515),apetitionforthewritofhabeas
corpusforunlawfulrestraintbymilitaryforceofacitizennotinthemilitaryserviceoftheUnitedStates
wasbeforetheUnitedStatesSupremeCourt.Afterthecasewasarguedandtakenunder
advisement,andbeforeconferenceinregardtothedecisiontobemade,Congresspassedan
emergencyActMarch27,1868,15Stat.atL.44,vetoedbythePresidentandrepassedoverhis
veto,repealingthejurisdictionoftheU.S.SupremeCourtinsuchcase.Accordingly,theSupreme
CourtdismissedtheappealwithoutpassingupontheconstitutionalityoftheReconstructionActs,
underwhichthenonmilitarycitizenwasheldbythemilitarywithoutbenefitofwritofhabeascorpusin
violationofSection9,ArticleIoftheU.S.Constitutionwhichprohibitsthesuspensionofthewritof
habeascorpus.
ThatActofCongressplacedtheReconstructionactsbeyondjudicialrecourseandavoidedtestsof
constitutionality.
ItisrecordedthatoneoftheSupremeCourtJustices,Grier,protestedagainsttheactionoftheCourt
asfollows:
"Thiscasewasfullyarguedinthebeginningofthismonth.Itisacasewhichinvolvesthelibertyand
rightsnotonlyoftheappellant,butofmillionsofourfellowcitizens.Thecountryandthepartieshada
righttoexpectthatitwouldreceivetheimmediateandsolemnattentionofthecourt.Bythe
postponementofthiscaseweshallsubjectourselves,whetherjustlyorunjustly,totheimputationthat
wehaveevadedtheperformanceofadutyimposedonusbytheConstitution,andwaitedfor
legislativeinterpositiontosupersedeouraction,andrelieveusfromresponsibility.Iamnotwillingto
beapartakeroftheeulogyoropprobriumthatmayfollow.Icanonlysay...Iamashamedthatsuch
opprobriumshouldbecastuponthecourtandthatitcannotberefuted."
ThetenStateswereorganizedintomilitarydistrictsundertheunconstitutional"ReconstructionActs,"
theirlawfullyconstitutedlegislaturesillegallywereremovedby"militaryforce,"andtheywere
replacedbyrump,socalledlegislatures,sevenofwhichcarriedoutmilitaryordersandpretendedto
ratifythe14thAmendment,asfollows:
38
ArkansasonApril6,1868
39
NorthCarolinaonJuly2,1868
40
FloridaonJune9,1868
41
LouisianaonJuly9,1868
42
SouthCarolinaonJuly9,1868
43
AlabamaonJuly13,1868
44
GeorgiaonJuly21,1868.
6.OftheabovesevenStateswhoselegislatureswereremovedandreplacedbyrump,socalled
legislatures,sixlegislaturesoftheStatesofLouisiana,Arkansas,SouthCarolina,Alabama,North
CarolinaandGeorgiahadratifiedthe13thAmendment,asshownbytheSecretaryofStates
ProclamationofDecember18,1865,withoutwhichsixStatesratifications,the13thAmendment
couldnotandwouldnothavebeenratifiedbecausesaidsixStatesmadeatotalof27outof36
StatesorexactlythreefourthsofthenumberrequiredbyArticleVoftheConstitutionforratification.

Furthermore,governmentsoftheStatesofLouisianaandArkansashadbeenreestablishedundera
45
proclamationissuedbyPresidentAbrahamLincolnDecember8,1863.
ThegovernmentofNorthCarolinahadbeenreestablishedunderaproclamationissuedbyPresident
46
AndrewJohnsondatedMay29,1865.
ThegovernmentofGeorgiahadbeenreestablishedunderaproclamationissuedbyPresident
47
AndrewJohnsondatedJune17,1865.
ThegovernmentofAlabamahadbeenreestablishedunderaproclamationissuedbyPresident
48
AndrewJohnsondatedJune21,1865.
ThegovernmentofSouthCarolinahadbeenreestablishedunderaproclamationissuedbyPresident
49
AndrewJohnsondatedJune30,1865.
50
Thesethree"ReconstructionActs"
underwhichtheaboveStatelegislatureswereillegallyremoved
andunlawfulrumporpuppetsocalledlegislaturessubstitutedinamockefforttoratifythe14th
Amendmentwereunconstitutional,nullandvoid,abinitio,andallactsdonethereunderwerealsonull
andvoid,includingthepurportedratificationofthel4thAmendmentbysaidsixSouthernpuppetState
legislaturesofArkansas,NorthCarolina,Louisiana,SouthCarolina,AlabamaandGeorgia.
ThoseReconstructionActsofCongressandallactsandthingsunlawfullydonethereunderwerein
violationofArticleIV,Section4oftheUnitedStatesConstitution,whichrequiredtheUnitedStatesto
guaranteeeveryStateintheUnionarepublicanformofgovernment.TheyviolatedArticleI,Section
3,andArticleVoftheConstitution,whichentitledeveryStateintheUniontotwoSenators,because
underprovisionsoftheseunlawfulactsofCongress,tenStatesweredeprivedofhavingtwo
Senators,orequalsuffrageintheSenate.
7.TheSecretaryofStateexpresseddoubtastowhetherthreefourthsoftherequiredstateshad
51
ratifiedthe14thAmendment,asshownbyhisproclamationofJuly20,1868.
PromptlyonJuly21,
52
1868,aJointResolutionwasadoptedbytheSenateandHouseofRepresentativesdeclaringthat
threefourthsoftheseveralStatesoftheUnionhadratifiedthe14thAmendment.Thatresolution,
however,includedpurportedratificationsbytheunlawfulpuppetlegislaturesoffiveStates,Arkansas,
NorthCarolina,Louisiana,SouthCarolinaandAlabama,whichhadpreviouslyrejectedthe14th
Amendmentbyactionoftheirlawfullyconstitutedlegislatures,asaboveshown.ThisJointResolution
assumedtoperformthefunctionoftheSecretaryofStateinwhomCongress,byActofApril20,
1818,hadvestedthefunctionofissuingsuchproclamationdeclaringtheratificationofConstitutional
Amendments.
TheSecretaryofStatebowedtotheactionofCongressandissuedhisproclamationofJuly28,
53
1868,
inwhichhestatedthathewasasactingunderauthorityoftheActofApril20,1818,but
pursuanttosaidResolutionofJuly21,1868.Helistedthreefourthsorsoofthethen37statesas
havingratifiedthe14thAmendment,includingthepurportedratificationoftheunlawfulpuppet
legislaturesoftheStatesofArkansas,NorthCarolina,Louisiana,SouthCarolinaandAlabama.
Withoutsaidsixunlawfulpurportedratificationstherewouldhavebeenonly26stateslefttoratifyout
of37whenaminimumof28stateswasrequiredforratificationbythreefourthsoftheStatesofthe
Union.
TheJointResolutionofCongressandtheresultingproclamationbytheSecretaryofStatealso
includedpurportedratificationsbytheStatesofOhioandNewJersey,althoughtheproclamation
recognizedthefactthatthelegislaturesofsaidstates,severalmonthspreviously,hadwithdrawntheir
ratificationsandeffectivelyrejectedthe14thAmendmentinJanuary,1868,andApril,1868.

Therefore,deductingthesetwostatesfromthepurportedratificationsofthe14thAmendment,only
23Stateratificationsatmostcouldbeclaimedwhereastheratificationof28States,orthreefourths
of37StatesintheUnion,wererequiredtoratifythe14thAmendment.
Fromalloftheabovedocumentedhistoricfacts,itisinescapablethatthe14thAmendmentnever
wasvalidlyadoptedasanarticleoftheConstitution,thatithasnolegaleffect,anditshouldbe
declaredbytheCourtstobeunconstitutional,andthereforenull,voidandofnoeffect.
TheConstitutionstrikesthe14thAmendmentwithnullity.Thedefendersofthe14thAmendment
contendthattheU.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.,compiledunderAct
ofCongressonJune30,1906,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.

Theunconstitutional14thAmendmentPart4of4
Thedefendersofthe14thAmendmentcontendthattheU.S.SupremeCourt
hasfinallydecideduponitsvalidity.Thatsnottrue.Inwhatisconsideredthe
leadingcase,Colemanv.Miller,507U.S.448,59S.Ct.972,theU.S.Supreme
Courtdidnotupholdthevalidityofthe14thAmendment.
Inthatcase,theCourtbrushedasideconstitutionalquestionsasthoughtheydidnotexist.For
instance,theCourtmadethestatementthat:
"ThelegislaturesofGeorgia,NorthCarolinaandSouthCarolinahadrejectedtheamendmentin
NovemberandDecember,1866.NewgovernmentswereerectedinthoseStates(andinothers)
underthedirectionofCongress.Thenewlegislaturesratifiedtheamendment,thatofNorthCarolina
onJuly4,1868,thatofSouthCarolinaonJuly9,1868,andthatofGeorgiaonJuly21,1868."
AndtheCourtgavenoconsiderationtothefactthatGeorgia,NorthCarolinaandSouthCarolinawere
threeoftheoriginalstatesoftheUnionwithvalidandexistingconstitutionsonanequalfootingwith
theotheroriginalstatesandthoselateradmittedintotheUnion.
WhatconstitutionalrightdidCongresshavetoremovethosestategovernmentsandtheirlegislatures
underunlawfulmilitarypowersetupbytheunconstitutional"ReconstructionActs,"whichhadfortheir

purpose,thedestructionandremovaloftheselegalstategovernmentsandthenullificationoftheir
Constitutions?
ThefactthatthesethreestatesandsevenotherSouthernStateshadexistingConstitutions,were
recognizedasstatesoftheUnion,againandagainhadbeendividedintojudicialdistrictsforholding
theirdistrictandcircuitcourtsoftheUnitedStateshadbeencalleduponbyCongresstoactthrough
theirlegislaturesupontwoAmendments,the13thand14th,andbytheirratificationshadactually
madepossibletheadoptionofthe13thAmendmentaswellastheirstategovernmentshavingbeen
reestablishedunderPresidentialProclamations,asshownbyPresidentAndrewJohnsonsVeto
messageandproclamations,wereallbrushedasidebytheCourtinColemanbythestatementthat:
"NewgovernmentswereerectedinthoseStates(andinothers)underthedirectionofCongress."and
thatthesenewlegislaturesratifiedtheAmendment.
TheU.S.SupremeCourtoverlookedthatitpreviouslyhadheldthatatnotimeweretheseSouthern
StatesoutoftheUnion.Whitev.Hart,1871,13Wall.646,654.
InColeman,theCourtdidnotadjudicateupontheinvalidityoftheActsofCongresswhichsetaside
thosestateConstitutionsandabolishedtheirstatelegislaturestheCourtsimplyreferredtothefact
thattheirlegallyconstitutedlegislatureshadrejectedthe14thAmendmentandthatthe"new
legislatures"hadratifiedtheAmendment.
TheCourtoverlookedthefact,too,thattheStateofVirginiawasalsooneoftheoriginalstateswith
itsConstitutionandLegislatureinfulloperationunderitscivilgovernmentatthetime.
TheCourtalsoignoredthefactthattheothersixSouthernStates,whichweregiventhesame
treatmentbyCongressundertheunconstitutional"ReconstructionActs,"allhadlegalconstitutions
andarepublicanformofgovernmentineachstate,aswasrecognizedbyCongressbyitsadmission
ofthosestatesintotheUnion.TheCourtcertainlymusttakejudicialcognizanceofthefactthatbefore
anewstateisadmittedbyCongressintotheUnion,CongressenactsanEnablingAct,toenablethe
inhabitantsoftheterritorytoadoptaConstitutiontosetuparepublicanformofgovernmentasa
conditionprecedenttotheadmissionofthestateintotheUnion,anduponapprovalofsuch
Constitution,CongressthenpassestheActofAdmissionofsuchstate.
AllthiswasignoredandbrushedasidebytheCourtintheColemancase.However,inColemanthe
Courtinadvertentlysaidthis:
"WheneverofficialnoticeisreceivedattheDepartmentofStatethatanyamendmentproposedtothe
ConstitutionoftheUnitedStateshasbeenadopted,accordingtotheprovisionsoftheConstitution,
theSecretaryofStateshallforthwithcausetheamendmenttobepublished,withhiscertificate,
specifyingtheStatesbywhichthesamemayhavebeenadopted,andthatthesamehasbecome
valid,toallintentsandpurposes,asapartoftheConstitutionoftheUnitedStates."
InHawsev.Smith,1920,253U.S.221,40S.Ct.227,theU.S.SupremeCourtunmistakablyheld:
"ThefiftharticleisagrantofauthoritybythepeopletoCongress.Thedeterminationofthemethodof
ratificationistheexerciseofanationalpowerspecificallygrantedbytheConstitutionthatpoweris
conferreduponCongress,andislimitedtotwomethods,byactionoftheLegislaturesofthreefourths
ofthestates,orconventionsinalikenumberofstates.Dodgev.Woolsey.18How.331,348,15L.
Ed.401.TheframersoftheConstitutionmighthaveadoptedadifferentmethod.Ratificationmight
havebeenlefttoavoteofthepeople,ortosomeauthorityofgovernmentotherthanthatselected.
Thelanguageofthearticleisplain,andadmitsofnodoubtinitsinterpretation.Itisnotthefunctionof
courtsorlegislativebodies,nationalorstate,toalterthemethodwhichtheConstitutionhasfixed."

Wesubmitthatinnoneofthecases,inwhichtheCourtavoidedtheconstitutionalissuesinvolvedin
thecompositionoftheCongresswhichadoptedtheJointResolutionforthe14thAmendment,didthe
CourtpassupontheconstitutionalityoftheCongresswhichpurportedtoadopttheJointResolution
forthe14thAmendment,with80Representativesand23Senators,ineffect,forciblyejectedor
deniedtheirseatsandtheirvotesontheJointResolutionproposingtheAmendment,inordertopass
thesamebyatwothirdsvote,aspointedoutintheNewJerseyLegislatureResolutiononMarch27,
1868.
TheconstitutionalrequirementssetforthinArticleVoftheConstitutionpermittheCongressto
proposeamendmentsonlywhenevertwothirdsofbothhousesshalldeemitnecessarythatis,
twothirdsofbothhousesasthenconstitutedwithoutforcibleejections.
SuchafragmentaryCongressalsoviolatedtheconstitutionalrequirementsofArticleVthatnostate,
withoutitsconsent,shallbedeprivedofitsequalsuffrageintheSenate.
Thereisnosuchthingasgivinglifetoanamendmentillegallyproposedorneverlegallyratifiedby
threefourthsofthestates.Thereisnosuchthingasamendmentbylachesnosuchthingas
amendmentbywaivernosuchthingasamendmentbyacquiescenceandnosuchthingas
amendmentbyanyothermeanswhatsoeverexceptthemeansspecifiedinArticleVofthe
Constitutionitself.
Itdoesnotsufficetosaythattherehavebeenhundredsofcasesdecidedunderthe14thAmendment
tosupplytheconstitutionaldeficienciesinitsproposalorratificationasrequiredbyArticleV.If
hundredsoflitigantsdidnotquestionthevalidityofthe14thAmendment,orquestionedthesame
perfunctorilywithoutsubmittingdocumentaryproofofthefactsofrecordwhichmadeitspurported
adoptionunconstitutional,theirfailurecannotchangetheConstitutionforthemillionsinAmerica.The
samethingistrueoflachesthesamethingistrueofacquiescencethesamethingistrueofill
consideredcourtdecisions.

Toascribeconstitutionallifetoanallegedamendmentwhichnevercameinto
beingaccordingtospecificmethodslaiddowninArticleVcannotbedone
withoutdoingviolencetoArticleVitself.
Thisistruebecausetheonlyquestionopentothecourtsiswhetherthealleged14thAmendment
becameapartoftheConstitutionthroughamethodrequiredbyArticleV.Anythingbeyondthatwhich
acourtiscalledupontoholdinordertovalidateanamendment,wouldbeequivalenttowritinginto
ArticleVanothermodeofamendmentwhichhasneverbeenauthorizedbythepeopleoftheUnited
States.
Onthispoint,therefore,thequestionis,wasthe14thAmendmentproposedandratifiedin
accordancewithArticleV?
Inansweringthisquestion,itisofnorealmomentthatdecisionshavebeenrenderedinwhichthe
partiesdidnotcontestorsubmitproperevidence,ortheCourtassumedthattherewasa14th
Amendment.IfastatuteneverinfactpassedbyCongress,throughsomeerrorofadministrationand
printinggotintothepublishedreportsofthestatutes,andifundersuchsupposedstatutecourtshad
leviedpunishmentuponanumberofpersonschargedunderit,andiftheerrorinthepublished
volumewasdiscoveredandthefactbecameknownthatnosuchstatutehadeverpassedin
Congress,itisunthinkablethattheCourtswouldcontinuetoadministerpunishmentinsimilarcases,
onanonexistentstatutebecausepriordecisionshaddoneso.Ifthatbetrueastoastatuteweneed

onlyrealizethegreatertruthwhentheprincipleisappliedtothesolemnquestionofthecontentsof
theConstitution.
Whilethedefectsinthemethodofproposingandthesubsequentmethodofcomputing"ratification"
isbriefedelsewhere,itshouldbenotedthatthefailuretocomplywithArticleVbeganwiththefirst
actionbyCongress.TheveryCongresswhichproposedthealleged14thamendmentunderthefirst
partofArticleVwasitself,atthatverytime,violatingthelastpartaswellasthefirstpartofArticleV
oftheConstitution.Weshallseehowthiswasdone.
Thereisone,andonlyone,provisionoftheConstitutionoftheUnitedStateswhichisforever
immutablewhichcanneverbechangedorexpunged.TheCourtscannotalterittheexecutives
cannotchangeittheCongresscannotchangeittheStatesthemselvesevenalltheStatesin
perfectconcertcannotamenditinanymannerwhatsoever,whethertheyactthroughconventions
calledforthepurposeorthroughtheirlegislatures.Noteventheunanimousvoteofeveryvoterinthe
UnitedStatescouldamendthisprovision.ItisaperpetualfixtureintheConstitution,soperpetualand
sofixedthatifthepeopleoftheUnitedStatesdesiredtochangeorexcludeit,theywouldbe
compelledtoabolishtheConstitutionandstartafresh.
Theunalterableprovisionisthis..."thatnoState,withoutitsconsent,shallbedeprivedofitsequal
suffrageintheSenate."
Astate,byitsownconsent,maywaivethisrightofequalsuffrage,butthatistheonlylegalmethodby
whichafailuretoaccordthisimmutablerightofequalsuffrageintheSenatecanbejustified.
CertainlynotbyforcibleejectionanddenialbyamajorityinCongress,aswasdonefortheadoption
oftheJointResolutionforthe14thAmendment.
StatementsbytheCourtintheColemancasethatCongresswasleftincompletecontrolofthe
mandatoryprocess,andthereforeitwasapoliticalaffairforCongresstodecideifanamendmenthad
beenratified,doesnotsquarewithArticleVoftheConstitutionwhichshowsnointentiontoleave
Congressinchargeofdecidingwhethertherehasbeenaratification.Evenaconstitutionally
recognizedCongressisgivenbutonevolitioninarticleV,thatis,tovotewhethertoproposean
Amendmentonitsowninitiative.TheremainingstepsbyCongressaremandatory.Iftwothirdsof
bothhousesshalldeemitnecessary,CongressshallproposeamendmentsiftheLegislaturesof
twothirdsoftheStatesmakeapplication,Congressshallcallaconvention.FortheCourttogive
CongressanypowerbeyondthattobefoundinArticleVistowritethenewmaterialintoArticleV.
ItwouldbeinconceivablethattheCongressoftheUnitedStatescouldpropose,compelsubmission
to,andthengivelifetoaninvalidamendmentbyresolvingthatitsefforthadsucceeded,regardlessof
compliancewiththepositiveprovisionsofArticleV.
ItshouldneednofurthercitationstosustainthepropositionthatneithertheJointResolution
proposingthe14thamendmentnoritsratificationbytherequiredthreefourthsoftheStatesinthe
UnionwereincompliancewiththerequirementsofArticleVoftheConstitution.
WhenthemandatoryprovisionsoftheConstitutionareviolated,theConstitutionitselfstrikeswith
nullitytheActthatdidviolencetoitsprovisions.Thus,theConstitutionstrikeswithnullitythe
purported14thAmendment.
TheCourts,boundbyoathtosupporttheConstitution,shouldreviewalloftheevidenceherein
submittedandmeasurethefactsprovingviolationsofthemandatoryprovisionsoftheConstitution
withArticleV,andfinallyrenderjudgmentdeclaringsaidpurportedamendmentnevertohavebeen
adoptedasrequiredbytheConstitution.

TheConstitutionmakesitthesworndutyofthejudgestoupholdtheConstitutionwhichstrikeswith
nullitythe14thAmendment.
And,asChiefJusticeMarshallpointedoutforaunanimousCourtinMarburyv.Madison(1Cranch
136at179):
"Theframersoftheconstitutioncontemplatedtheinstrumentasaruleforthegovernmentofcourts,
aswellasofthelegislature."
"WhydoesajudgesweartodischargehisdutiesagreeablytotheconstitutionoftheUnitedStates,if
thatconstitutionformsnoruleforhisgovernment?"
"Ifsuchbetherealstateofthings,thatisworsethansolemnmockery.Toprescribe,ortotakethis
oath,becomesequallyacrime."
"Thus,theparticularphraseologyoftheConstitutionoftheUnitedStatesconfirmsandstrengthens
theprinciple,supposedtobeessentialtoallwrittenconstitutions,courts,aswellasother
departments,areboundbythatinstrument."
Thefederalcourtsactuallyrefusetohearargumentontheinvalidityofthe14thAmendment,even
whentheissueispresentedsquarelybythepleadingsandtheevidenceasabove.
OnlyanarousedpublicsentimentinfavorofpreservingtheConstitutionandourinstitutionsand
freedomsunderconstitutionalgovernment,andthefuturesecurityofourcountry,willbreakthe
politicalbarrierwhichnowpreventsjudicialconsiderationoftheunconstitutionalityofthe14th
Amendment.
TheabovetreatiseistakeninpartfromtheresearchofJudgeL.H.Perez.

Furthernotesandaddenda
ItmustbenotedthattheResolutionproposingthetwelvesectionswhichcomprisetheBillofRights
wasnotissuedtotheStateswithasignature,norwerenos.11,12,ortheoriginal13th.The
proposed"Corwin"13thof1861legalizingSlaveryandacknowledgingStatesrights,signedas
approvedbyBuchanantwodaysbeforeLincolnsinauguration,andtheAntiSlaveryAmendment,
signedbythenPresidentLincolnweretheonlytwosignedbypresidents.SoPresidentAndrew
Johnsonsargumentwasprobablydefective.
Itmaybehelpfultoknowthatthe14thamendmentproclamationsofJuly20,1868,note51,andJuly
28,1868,note53,wereissuedasPresidentialExecutiveOrders.
PresidentialExecutiveOrderNo.6,issuedJuly20,1868:Ratificationofthe14thAmendmentcertified
asvalid,providedtheconsentofOhioandNewJerseybedeemedasremaininginforcedespite
subsequentwithdrawal,signedbyWilliamH.Seward,SecretaryofState,hastheformofa
proclamation.
PresidentialExecutiveOrderNo.7,issuedJuly28,1868:14thAmendmentcertifiedasineffectand
orderedpublished,signedbyWilliamH.Seward,SecretaryofState.
TheforegoingisfromPresidentialExecutiveOrderTitleListPresidentialExecutiveOrders,two
volumes(N.Y.:Books,Inc.,1944CopyrightbyMayorofN.Y.1944),vol.1,pp.12.
Inthislightthe14th(amendment),whichhasperplexedmany,isanExecutiveOrder,notan(Article
of)AmendmenttotheConstitutionoftheunitedStatesofAmerica,albeitastatuteandsoremainsan
ExecutiveOrder.
Whatreallycountsarethesepoints:
NewJerseywasdisenfranchisedintheSenatebyhavingitslawfullyelectedSenator
accepted,andthenrejected,andwithoutatwothirdsvote

 Oregonsfaultyratificationvotewithunlawfulstatelegislatorsbeingallowedtocastvotesand
thelawfullyconstitutedstatelegislaturethenrejectingtheFourteenth,buttoolate.
Nonrepublican(Reconstruction)governmentsofthesouthernStatesimposedbymilitaryforce
andfiat,cannotratifyanything.EithertheFourteenthislegalandtheantislaveryamendment
isnot,ortheantislaveryamendmentislegalandtheFourteenthisnot.