The Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution. Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, two thirds of both Houses concurring, that the following Articles be proposed to the Legislatures of the several States as amendments to the Constitution of the United States, all, or any of which articles, when ratified by three fourths of the said Legislatures, to be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of the said Constitution; viz.
Articles in addition to, and Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America, proposed by Congress and ratified by the Legislatures of the several States, pursuant to the fifth Article of the original Constitution.
An erroneous position is being put forward as a 'fact': '-- Right in the Preamble to the Bill of Rights it says that the amendments are to apply to the federal government only. --'.
This is wrong, - as we can see above: "-- all, or any of which articles, when ratified by three fourths of the said Legislatures, to be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of the said Constitution; --"
Sig226 points out; "-- Compare and contrast:
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
The fact that they ignored the very clear wording of Article VI does not change its wording. They also said that the constitution supported slavery. It did this only by mentioning how much a slave counted in the census, yet slavery went on for 70 years after the document was written
Sig, - as we see, the writers of the preamble did not 'ignore' the fact that the BOR's were to be made part of our "Law of the Land"; -- to them, once the Preamble stated the obvious, -- that the BOR's were "part of the said Constitution"; -- It was equally obvious that Article VI applied.
'They' in that sentence was a reference to the courts and states that ignored Article VI for decades after the constitution was adopted. I did not mean the signatories to the constitution. I think the meaning of Article VI is crystal clear, but history shows that it was ignored.