On Sep 12, 2015, at 11:01 AM, Steven Pattison (Kansas) <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
This You Tube video is so clear and in plain language that every one that buys something from any store should be able to understand. The video is 30 minutes long.
And also the problem with the 14th Amendment never being passed by the Federal Congress and later Kansas attempted to pass it
Also I have written about this action that was done without “Delegated Authority” which simply means that it is unconstitutional:
The unconstitutional 14th Amendment – Part 2 of 4 – There was neither a quorum in the first place, nor was it ratified by three-fourths of the states.
The unconstitutional 14th Amendment – Part 3 of 4 – Spreading Lincolnian democracy
The following court case in Kansas about the 14th Amendment was Reargued 73 years later on April 17, 18, 1939 and Decided: June 5, 1939. This should cause you to want to know the true. We also have THE NON-RATIFICATION OF THE FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT By Utah Supreme Court Justice A. H. Ellett and June 13, 1967 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD – HOUSE 15641′ titled “THE 14TH AMENDMENT-EQUAL PROTECTION LAW OR TOOL OF USURPATION”
Proposed 1866; Allegedly ratified 1868. See Fourteenth Amendment Law Library for argument it was not ratified.]
The defenders of the 14th Amendment contend that the U.S. Supreme Court has finally decided upon its validity. That’s not true. In what is considered the leading case, Coleman v. Miller, 507 U.S. 448, 59 S. Ct. 972 – Proclamation under authority of Congress that an amendment has been ratified will carry with it a solemn insurance by the Congress that ratification has taken place as the Constitution commands. Upon this assurance a proclaimed amendment must be accepted as a part of the Constitution, leaving to the judiciary its traditional authority of interpretation. 4 To the extent that the Court’s opinion in the present case even impliedly assumes a power to make judicial interpretation of the exclusive constitutional authority of Congress over submission and ratification of amendments, we are unable to agree.
Therefore, any judicial expression amounting to more than mere acknowledgment of exclusive Congressional power over the political process of amendment is a mere admonition to the Congress in the nature of an advisory opinion, given wholly without constitutional authority.
Opinion of Mr. Justice FRANKFURTER.
It is the view of Mr. Justice ROBERTS, Mr. Justice BLACK, Mr. Justice DOUGLAS and myself that the petitioners have no standing in this Court.
The only webpage that reports something different then what U.S. Representative, Cordell Hull reported on the floor of Congress – Congressional Record – House July 12, 1909 Page 4404. This webpage about the 14th Amendment by Garrett Epps, a contributing editor for The Atlantic states:
“Settle back and let me tell you a brief version of the story I tell in my new book, Democracy Reborn – the story of the Fourteenth Amendment and its vital role in making our Constitution truly democratic.
He teaches constitutional law and creative writing for law students at the University of Baltimore and he says “a brief version of the story”! Does this mean it is his story which may mean his history?
You be the Judge!
/S/ Steven Wayne Pattison