At 2003-05-02 02:56 +0000, Steve Schear wrote:
Funny thing about the 14th, the representatives of the Southern States (who had previously been sworn in and seated for the session) didn't get to vote on it. They were ejected and the doors barred (the Senate even barred a New Jersey rep. who held the deciding vote and was strongly opposed to the measure). They then reported that the majority (of those in the room) approved the measure, which was sent on to the states for ratification. A similar travesty played out in the counting of ratifying states and reporting out the results. When challenged in the Supreme Court the robed ones punted, saying it was a "political matter for Congress to decide". Thus spake Tyranny.
That may be so, but stories abound of drunk state legislators, corruption, bribery, and other shenanigans involved in the ratification of every Amendment from the Reconstruction up to the point people became serious about doing the Right Thing (tm) with stuff like female suffrage and the repeal of the prohibition amendment. There are serious questions about the validity, specifically, of the 16th, 17th, and 18th amendments, and it is quite clear that even were there no trickery involved in the passage of the civil rights amendments, Confederate States were required to ratify them as a condition for re-joining (read cessation of occupation) the Union. Just like the 16th, if someone got a serious opposition movement going against the 14th, Congress and the States would quickly ratify an amendment authorizing ex-post-facto law in the specific instance in question (and probably for all the Amendments that were questionably ratified so they'd only have to deal with it once), and a follow-on amendment similar to the 14th which would have effects retroactive to the "ratification" of the 14th. -- Freedom's untidy, and free people are free to make mistakes and commit crimes and do bad things. They're also free to live their lives and do wonderful things. --Rumsfeld, 2003-04-11