[jwalsh07]

Of course, the body of legal thought is also that the "privileges and immunities" clause of the 14th Amendment means... well, nothing. Absloutely nothing. I'm sure they debated over this language and included it for no purpose whatsoever. But that's what the "originalists" would have you think.

I have concluded that you are a joke.

[lugsoul]

You've been a joke for a while. You run around acting like the Blaine Amendment is a silver bullet on incorporation, while, if you actually know anything about the subject, you are aware not only that its proposal was a blatantly political move to bolster Blaine's political aspirations, but also that its intended goal and the subject of its debates was the prevention of funding for parochial schools. The questions surrounding the Blaine Amendment are far more complicated than you present - not because the debate around the amendment confirmed a lack of intent to incorporate in the passage of the 14th Amendment, but because it contradicted volumes of debate on the 14th which clearly demonstrates that incorporation was a fundamental goal of the Amendment.

Now, since you consider my earlier comments a joke, why don't you tell us all, after Slaughter-House, what the legal import of the privileges and immunities clause is?