2 Up 2 Down
Veteran
This is so stupid. Majority of the other amendments were written with white men in mind
Trump says the 14th amendment was for children of slaves not illegal immigrants
- Thread starter Amerikan Melanin
- Start date
Fillerguy
Veteran
Google exists breh. Slavery does not appear in our constitution, for multiple reasons. The closest we got are "such persons".Are we sure about this?
That doesn't sound accurate.
Indian does appear several times, however.
“Implications” with the 14th amendment.
BLACKS BEWARE: Civil Rights Attorney Read J. Jackson's Full Dissent In Birthright Citizenship Case
“ On this 4th of July—a day that claims to celebrate freedom and equality—I read and explain Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson’s full dissent in the Supreme Court’s Trump v. CASA decision. This case threatens birthright citizenship and weakens the power of federal courts to stop unconstitutional executive actions. Justice Jackson’s dissent stands as a powerful defense of the Constitution and a direct challenge to the majority’s dangerous shift toward authoritarianism. Her words are especially urgent today, as we confront the reality that freedom in America has never been guaranteed for everyone. Watch as I break down her dissent and expose what’s really at stake this Independence Day.”
Civil Rights Attorney Answers If Trump Can Deport Black Americans After Birthright Citizenship Case
Attorney Explains How Trump Could End Black Birthright Citizenship
BLACKS BEWARE: Civil Rights Attorney Read J. Jackson's Full Dissent In Birthright Citizenship Case
“ On this 4th of July—a day that claims to celebrate freedom and equality—I read and explain Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson’s full dissent in the Supreme Court’s Trump v. CASA decision. This case threatens birthright citizenship and weakens the power of federal courts to stop unconstitutional executive actions. Justice Jackson’s dissent stands as a powerful defense of the Constitution and a direct challenge to the majority’s dangerous shift toward authoritarianism. Her words are especially urgent today, as we confront the reality that freedom in America has never been guaranteed for everyone. Watch as I break down her dissent and expose what’s really at stake this Independence Day.”
Civil Rights Attorney Answers If Trump Can Deport Black Americans After Birthright Citizenship Case
Attorney Explains How Trump Could End Black Birthright Citizenship
Last edited:
The 14th amendment is literally based on the The Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857).
Transcript
DECEMBER TERM, 1856.DRED SCOTT
versus
JOHN F. A. SANDFORD.
Dred Scott, Plaintiff In Error, v. John F. A. Sandford.
"A free negro of the African race, whose ancestors were brought to this country and sold as slaves, is not a "citizen" within the meaning of the Constitution of the United States."
[...]
Dred Scott v. John F. A. Sandford. Plea to the Jurisdiction of the Court.
April Term, 1854.
"And the said John F. A. Sandford, in his own proper person, comes and says that this court ought not to have or take further cognizance of the action aforesaid, because he says that said cause of action, and each and every of them, (if any such have accrued to the said Dred Scott,) accrued to the said Dred Scott out of the jurisdiction of this court, and exclusively within the jurisdiction of the courts of the State of Missouri, for that, to wit; the said plaintiff, Dred Scott, is not a citizen of the State of Missouri, as alleged in his declaration, because he is a negro of African descent; his ancestors were of pure African blood, and were brought into this country and sold as negro slaves, and this the said Sandford is ready to verify. Wherefore he prays judgment whether this court can or will take farther cognizance of the action aforesaid."
[...]
"The plaintiff himself acquired no title to freedom by being taken, by his owner, to Rock Island, in Illinois, and brought back to Missouri. This court has heretofore decided that the status or condition of a person of African descent depended on the laws of the State in which he resided."
[...]
"It will be observed, that the plea applies to that class of persons only whose ancestors were negroes of the African race, and imported into this country, and sold and held as slaves. The only matter in issue before the court, therefore, is, whether the descendants of such slaves, when they shall be emancipated, or who are born of parents who had become free before their birth, are citizens of a State, in the sense in which the word citizen is used in the Constitution of the United States."
Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857)
EnlargeDownload Link Citation: Judgment in the U.S. Supreme Court Case Dred Scott v. John F. A. Sandford; 3/6/1857; Dred Scott, Plaintiff in Error, v. John F. A. Sandford; Appellate Jurisdiction Case Files, 1792 - 2010; Records of the Supreme Court of the United States, Record Group 267...
www.archives.gov
Citation: Judgment in the U.S. Supreme Court Case Dred Scott v. John F. A. Sandford; 3/6/1857; Dred Scott, Plaintiff in Error, v. John F. A. Sandford; Appellate Jurisdiction Case Files, 1792 - 2010; Records of the Supreme Court of the United States, Record Group 267; National Archives Building, Washington, DC.
"In this ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court stated that enslaved people were not citizens of the United States and, therefore, could not expect any protection from the federal government or the courts. The opinion also stated that Congress had no authority to ban slavery from a Federal territory
In 1846, an enslaved Black man named Dred Scott and his wife, Harriet, sued for their freedom in St. Louis Circuit Court. They claimed that they were free due to their residence in a free territory where slavery was prohibited.
The odds were in their favor. They had lived with their enslaver, an army surgeon, at Fort Snelling, then in the free Territory of Wisconsin. The Scotts' freedom could be established on the grounds that they had been held in bondage for extended periods in a free territory and were then returned to a slave state. Courts had ruled this way in the past.
However, what appeared to be a straightforward lawsuit between two private parties became an 11-year legal struggle that culminated in one of the most notorious decisions ever issued by the United States Supreme Court. Scott lost his case, which worked its way through the Missouri state courts; he then filed a new federal suit which ultimately reached the Supreme Court.
On its way to the Supreme Court, the Dred Scott case grew in scope and significance as slavery became the single most explosive issue in American politics. By the time the case reached the high court, it had come to have enormous political implications for the entire nation.
On March 6, 1857, Chief Justice Roger B. Taney read the majority opinion of the Court, which stated that enslaved people were not citizens of the United States and, therefore, could not expect any protection from the federal government or the courts. The opinion also stated that Congress had no authority to ban slavery from a federal territory. This decision moved the nation a step closer to the Civil War.
The decision of Scott v. Sandford, considered by many legal scholars to be the worst ever rendered by the Supreme Court, was overturned by the 13th and 14th amendments to the Constitution, which abolished slavery and declared all persons born in the United States to be citizens of the United States."
Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857)
EnlargeDownload Link Citation: Judgment in the U.S. Supreme Court Case Dred Scott v. John F. A. Sandford; 3/6/1857; Dred Scott, Plaintiff in Error, v. John F. A. Sandford; Appellate Jurisdiction Case Files, 1792 - 2010; Records of the Supreme Court of the United States, Record Group 267...
www.archives.gov
Last edited:
Diunx
Probably drunk
No, because its BS, that Amendment was used for the millions of children of euroean immigrants in the 1800's and 1900's.
Great point,Has ICE gone after Euro Illegals yet?
Irish, undocumented, and unsure of their future in Trump's America
They run businesses. They tend bars. They pay taxes. But still they live in fear. There are thousands of undocumented Irish immigrants in America today, and some of them shared their stories.
www.cbsnews.com
Analysis: Who are the immigrants who come to the U.S.? Here's the data
Most undocumented immigrants either have lived in the country for decades or have legal protections.
www.pbs.org
Last edited:
Exactly what we all know. White illegal immigrants are “different”Great point,
Irish, undocumented, and unsure of their future in Trump's America
They run businesses. They tend bars. They pay taxes. But still they live in fear. There are thousands of undocumented Irish immigrants in America today, and some of them shared their stories.
Analysis: Who are the immigrants who come to the U.S.? Here's the data
Most undocumented immigrants either have lived in the country for decades or have legal protections.
Great point,
Irish, undocumented, and unsure of their future in Trump's America
They run businesses. They tend bars. They pay taxes. But still they live in fear. There are thousands of undocumented Irish immigrants in America today, and some of them shared their stories.
Analysis: Who are the immigrants who come to the U.S.? Here's the data
Most undocumented immigrants either have lived in the country for decades or have legal protections.
When they need them numbers up, skin color will stop mattering.
OP is an agent and Trump's team knows what they are doing. Should be obvious. Divisive and conquer tactics. Pitting non whites against each other.
The stupid will take the bait as usual
For years they had white adjacent folks in their census.
I wonder what their actual number is. It’s far less that is for certain.
