When you make your argument about your debating opponent, you are losing.
What I said was that the 14th amendment was "ratified" by puppet governments, in a manner completely contrary to the founders/framers design of "consent of the governed."
You very well know that those puppet governments only voted for the 13th, 14th and 15th amendments because they were forced to do so by occupation armies.
Constitutional law is not supposed to operate through coercion. It should be amended through a legitimate process of consent by each state.
Take that argument to court.
I already know how to spell "stare decisis!"
That a court says so, does not automatically compel me to ignore what is actually true.
When you make your argument about your debating opponent, you are losing.What I said was that the 14th amendment was "ratified" by puppet governments, in a manner completely contrary to the founders/framers design of "consent of the governed."
Are the words of 14A Section 1 the law of the land? It is a yes or no question.