[inquest]

The only thing in that paragraph that could even come close to referring to the Bill of Rights is the privileges-and-immunities clause. But "privileges and immunities" are not rights. And it's very easy to show that it did not refer to the BOR, because right after it it says, "nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law," which was lifted right out of the BOR. So if the P&I clause was intended to comprise the BOR, why was there any need to add on the due-process clause? It would have already been understood.

[tpaine]

Reread Blacks explanation. -- The 14th was based on overturning the Barron decision.

Really, - you should read more on the basic history of this issue, if you intend to attack its premise.