19366Re: [tips_and_tricks] 14th Amendment Not Confined To The Protection Of Citizens
- Apr 15, 2013HOWEVER, the Yick Wo case is not the only one in which the court has ruled about the applicability and meaning of the 14th Amendment.
"This court declared in the Slaughter-House cases that the Fourteenth Amendment as well as the Thirteenth and Fifteenth were adopted to protect the Negroes in their freedom." Madden v. Kentucky 309 US 83 (1940).
"The rights of Citizens of the State, as such, are not under consideration in the Fourteenth Amendment. They stand as they did before the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment, and are fully guaranteed by other provisions."
United States v. Anthony: 24 Fed. Cas. 829, 830 (Case No. 14,459) .
"The privileges and immunities clause of the 14th Amendment protects very few rights because it neither incorporates any of the Bill of Rights nor protects all rights of individual citizens. See Slaughter-House Cases, 83
U.S. (16 Wall.) 36, 21 L.Ed. 394 (1873). Instead, this provision protects only those rights peculiar to being a citizen of the federal government; it does not protect those rights which relate to state citizenship." Jones v. Temmer, 829 F.Supp. 1226 (1993).
===================================On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 6:27 PM, Legalbear <bear@...> wrote:
“The Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution is Not Confined To The Protection Of Citizens. It says: "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." These provisions are universal in their application, to all persons within the territorial jurisdiction, without regard to any differences of race, of color, or of nationality; and the equal protection of the laws is a pledge of the protection of equal laws.” Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 US 356, 369 (1886).
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>