[Philo-Junius]

You don’t seem to be following the argument. Whether or not the states had been in the Union, they forfeited their Congressional representation by their acts of secession. Once they decided they wanted that back, they were confronted with the hard bargain requiring their ratification of the post-war Amendments as a precondition of regaining their representation.

No one challenges the legitimacy of the state governments, or their post-war right to ratify amendments, or not, according to their perceptions of their states’ interests.

The fact that those legislatures saw ratification of the 14th Amendment as part of a bargain to regain their states’ congressional representation does not make the ratification a compelled act.

[djsherin]

***Whether or not the states had been in the Union, they forfeited their Congressional representation by their acts of secession.***

They didn’t, according to the federal government. So why then should the federal government have any need whatsoever to “readmit” them?

[MamaTexan]

Once they decided they wanted that back, they were confronted with the hard bargain requiring their ratification of the post-war Amendments as a precondition of regaining their representation.

Which they regained with the 13th Amendment, a piece of legislation that passed WITHOUT the legitimacy of the votes of the Southern States even being questioned. Why? Because they agreed too it. Once the 14th was put up for a vote and they didn't agree...suddenly they were no longer 'legitimate'.

Sounds like a case of "We'll let you play as long as you play our way".

Can you source any Congressional legislation denoting such 'preconditions'?

-----

No one challenges the legitimacy of the state governments, or their post-war right to ratify amendments, or not, according to their perceptions of their states’ interests.

Sorry, but that seems to be exactly what you're doing. Pass the 13th, but balk on the 14th and POOF! we'll use federal force until you agree with us.

-----

The fact that those legislatures saw ratification of the 14th Amendment as part of a bargain to regain their states’ congressional representation does not make the ratification a compelled act.

LOL! You and I apparently have very different definitions of the word 'compelled'.

-----

You don’t seem to be following the argument.

BTW, I'm following the argument just fine. Insulting my intelligence may make you fell better, but it doesn't make my arguments any less viable.