And robertpaulsen said: "No. The USSC said nothing about "privileges and immunities" in the above case. The "P&I vs. due process" argument is a separate subject. "
robertpaulsen also said: It was thought that the U.S. Constitution BOR would be selectively incorporated under the P&I Clause of the 14th amendment. The USSC surprised everyone and used the Due Process Clause of the 14th amendment instead. Why? I don't know.
I think that you need to read Gitlow v. New York a little more carefully.
With regard to freedom of speech the decision states:
"For present purposes we may and do assume that freedom of speech and of the press -- which are protected by the First Amendment from abridgment by Congress -- are among the fundamental personal rights and "liberties" protected by the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment from impairment by the States."
Since the court decided AGAINST Gitlow and ruled that his liberty was not deprived without due process, the question arises, how did the Supreme Court make the determination that freedom of speech was included among those liberties. Their reference to the First Amendment protection is only relevant in light of the "privileges and immunities" which are extended to citizens of the United States.
Looks as though they simply declared it to be so.
"Their reference to the First Amendment protection is only relevant in light of the "privileges and immunities" which are extended to citizens of the United States."
Nowhere in the case is P&I mentioned. What's with you and P&I? Get off it -- it's irrelevant.