[Eastbound]

Well, that clears that up. Thank you. Onward to more intriguing things, like why did Congress accept the new definition by way of an amendment in that case and then allow the court to re-define the word 'marriage' (which also had a legal definition) without a constitutional amendment? (Another topic for another time.)

[calenel]

"why did Congress accept the new definition by way of an amendment in that case "

The 14th Amendment had the goal of insuring that freed slaves and other blacks were given full citizenship - in the north as well as the south. It also explicitly eliminated the 3/5 ratio by which 'other persons' were counted for purposes of allocating representatives - just in case there was some confusion as to the meaning of 'free persons'. If that ratio was still in effect the 'population' of Georgia, for example, would be more than 1 million fewer for purposes of allocating House seats (and consequently the Electoral College) resulting in a loss of one or two seats/votes. They would go to states with relatively low black populations.