The Modern Criticisms of the U.S. Constitution: Rethinking the 14th Amendment

Introduction

The 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, passed in 1868, fundamentally transformed the legal environment of the states. This amendment has been the subject of extensive debates and criticisms, with many arguing that it has been misapplied and misinterpreted over time, leading to a form of legal system labeled as akin to communism. This article underscores the need to revisit the 14th Amendment and potentially amend or repeal it to rectify these issues.

Historical Context and Current Interpretations

The 14th Amendment's primary objectives were to protect former slaves from racial discrimination and ensure fair treatment under the law. Over time, however, courts have interpreted certain provisions in ways that have led to unintended consequences. Specifically, the clause that grants citizenship to all persons born or naturalized in the United States has been used to create a new class of citizens with fewer rights than traditional state-based citizens. This has raised significant concerns about the nature of citizenship and the limits of state powers.

Legal Interpretations and Criticisms

Many legal experts and scholars argue that the 14th Amendment has been misused by the Supreme Court. In Slaughter-House Cases (1873), the court stated that the clause protects rights peculiar to federal citizenship and not those related to state citizenship. This means that fundamental rights, such as the right to trial by jury and the right to bear arms, are not necessarily protected against state infringement.

Implications of Misinterpretation

The misinterpretation of the 14th Amendment has led to a form of legal system that is perceived as more akin to communism than the federalist system intended by the Founding Fathers. This has been largely due to the use of terms like "United States" in ways that blur the line between federal and state powers, and the expansion of the federal government's oversight into state matters. Corrupt government entities, particularly those working in conjunction with what critics deem "treasonous" judges, have imposed policies and laws that infringe upon traditional American liberties.

Amending or Repealing the 14th Amendment

To address these issues, many advocate for either amending or repealing the 14th Amendment. An amendment could clarify the intended scope of the clause, ensuring that all citizens, regardless of their status, are protected by fundamental rights defined in the Bill of Rights. Repealing the amendment could, in some cases, restore the original balance of power between the federal and state governments.

Conclusion

The 14th Amendment has been a cornerstone of U.S. legal history, but its misapplication and misinterpretation have raised serious concerns about the nature of citizenship and the limitations on state powers. It is imperative that future legal debates and amendments consider the original intent of the Founding Fathers and reprioritize the protection of individual liberties.

Keywords: 14th Amendment, Constitution Criticisms, State Citizenship Rights