LAWLESSNESS: The Mess SCOTUS Has Made of the First Amendment — Part II (‘Due Process’)

NOTE: This is the second of a two-part post.  You can find Part I here.  This is a lengthy post, but it is crucial that all Americans understand the argument made here. I cannot urge the reader strongly enough to read and — if necessary — re-read this post until the reader fully understands that the argument made here is that of the Founders and, as such, represents the only legitimate understanding of the issues involved.


The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) had been actively working to destroy the Constitution for over one hundred years. Nowhere is this more clearly evident in its attack upon the First Amendment. In this post, I am going to show how this was done, and in doing so, I will demonstrate that the SCOTUS is no longer a legitimate agent of the law, but a lawless body of oligarchs. This time, we start with Section I of the 14th Amendment:

Amendment XIV

Section 1.

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

In the 1947 case of Everson v Board of Education, SCOTUS applied the ‘Establishment clause’ of the First Amendment to the States.  This was the first time this had been done.  SCOTUS used a judicial interpretation of the 14th Amendment to justify this action.  In the opinion of the Court, religious liberty is covered by or included in the ‘life, liberty or property’ mentioned in the 14th Amendment.

To make a long, murky legal argument understandable, what SCOTUS did was to rule that the 14th Amendment re-wrote the entire U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights. Originally, the U.S. Constitution established a Federal system of government subordinate to the States.  Originally, the Constitution mostly restricted that Federal government. It also established a strong system of checks and balances.  What this 1947 SCOTUS ruling did was affirm that the 14th Amendment had re-written the Constitution.  Now, the Constitution is understood to establish a National government to which the States are subordinate.  Furthermore, the entire Bill of Rights now applies equally to the States.

This is the real damage that was done by the 1947 SCOTUS ruling in Everson v Board of Education: it incorporated the 1st Amendment against the States.

The ramifications of this ruling cannot be under-stated.  In short, with one ruling, SCOTUS declared the destruction of the Constitution and system of government that was established by our Founders and replaced it with one that is thoroughly Progressive in its foundation and totally illegal in its establishment.

Normally, this is the point where I would show you that SCOTUS distorted the plain meaning of the language in the 14th Amendment to demonstrate that this ruling is a perversion of the law.  I could do this here — if I wanted to do so.  However, researching the history behind the 14th Amendment, I have discovered that this was most likely what the authors of the Amendment actually wanted to do: erase the original constitution and replace it with a Progressive version of its former self.  Therefore, on the surface, it would appear that the States did — in fact — replace the original, federal Constitution with a Progressive, national constitution.

Now, because I do seek the Truth, and because I have built much of my understanding of the founding of this nation upon what the Founders said they were trying to do, I am loath to deviate from that same standard in evaluating the original intent of the framers of the 14th Amendment.  So I won’t bother to risk committing a fallacy by explaining how — even assuming the intent to totally replace the Constitution — the 14th Amendment still does not say what the 1947 SCOTUS ruling claims it says.  I am not going to do that because I do not have to do so to defeat the 14th Amendment.  this is because the 14th Amendment was not legally ratified!!!

I want to start by stating a very clear and irrefutable fact:

The Founders clearly, forcefully and repeatedly affirmed that the States had the right to secede from the Union.

This was well known and understood by the States when the original Constitution was ratified.  Therefore — no matter what the cause used to justify the act — when the Southern States succeeded, they were within their rights to do so.  And — no matter what the cause used to justify the act — when the Northern States attacked, they acted unlawfully.  It is true that slavery was central to the Civil War, but the central fact of the matter is that the war was about the right of a State to determine its own destiny — a right asserted and defended in the Declaration of Independence.  This mean, by that same Declaration, the North was and has ever been in the wrong.

[NOTE: Please do not bother commenting to call me a racist, or claim I am supporting slavery.  I am neither.  I have already stated that slavery was the issue of the Civil War, but States’ Rights was undeniably the principle under-pinning that issue.]

Now that we know that the North was the aggressor, and by the principles of the Declaration, it was acting unlawfully, let us look at what followed.  When the Southern States surrendered, the North started dictating to them.  This includes the new State Constitutions.  In the 1871 case, White v. Hart, the argument was even made that parts of the Georgia Constitution should be changed because the Constitution had been written under the duress of Northern hostility.  Not surprisingly, the SCOTUS ruled against the plaintiff.  The North also passed the Civil Rights Act of 1866.  In that law, the Southern States were ordered to ratify the 14th Amendment.  Here again, this represents clear duress.  The North had instituted martial law in the South, which means the Southern States were doing nothing voluntarily.  This represented yet another clear violation of the U.S. Constitution — by the North!

If the North was purporting to operate according the U.S. Constitution, not only did it not have the right to attack the Southern States for seceding, but it also had a Constitutional duty to insure each and every State had a republican form of government.  Now, to be clear, this is what the North claimed it was doing.  But, in reality, a republican form of government requires open and free agreement by the People of that State — something the North was denying them by acting as the government of the Southern States while directing that the Southern States create governments suitable to the North’s liking.

To sum this up, all of this means that the Northern States essentially dictated the changes to the Constitution to the South.  At the very least, this means the original Southern States still retain a legal right to not only secede — again — but also to reject this unlawfully altered Constitution under which we are all now enslaved.


In the course of researching his post, I realized that the Republican Party is now and has always been thoroughly Progressive.  It was established on the pretense of ending slavery, but its true goal was to establish a Progressive, National government.  It is a goal from which neither the GOP or the later Democrat Party have ever deviated.  Therefore, the GOP is not and has never been ‘Conservative.’  It is nothing less than the flip side of the Progressive Democrat coin, and both Parties are working toward the same goal: the enslavement of Man!


NOTE: I do not know how I could have missed the ramifications of the 14th Amendment for so many years.  I just today discovered them.  I studied the basics of this issue as best I could today, and threw this post up in response to what has been a shock to my sensibilities.  As I get a better understanding of how this happened and what it means for the future liberty of Man, I will amend this post and update the board with additional posts.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s