[Poohbah]

Yes, the 2nd was ratified along with the other nine amendments of the BOR. The "criteria demanded" wasn't established by "the "Law That Never Was" crowd", it was demanded far earlier than it ever came into existence.

Except that when you apply that criteria in the fashion that the "Law that Never Was" crowd demands, EVERY ratification instrument is grossly defective (misspellings, different punctuation, et cetera).

Yes, I believe the Constitution was ratified. In fact, it is historical fact that it was ratified.

Not if you buy the "Law That Never Was" argument.

Kind of hard to refute that.

Actually, it's incredibly easy to refute. According to Bannister et al, even misplacing a comma invalidates the ratification instrument. It must be letter-perfect in all aspects when compared against the original text voted on in Congress.

No two ratification instruments submitted by the states meet those criteria.

It is also historical fact that the 16th wasn't, though many wish that it weren't so.

In that case, why have none of the legislatures of the several states that allegedly did NOT vote to ratify the 16th Amendment challenged the alleged ratification?

[philman_36]

Ramble, ramble ramble...insinuate, castigate, reprobate.
Ah...
In that case, why have none of the legislatures of the several states that allegedly did NOT vote to ratify the 16th Amendment challenged the alleged ratification?
Something coherent!
Inside Oklahoma's 16th Amendment lawsuit

Time will tell.

[ApesForEvolution]

"In that case, why have none of the legislatures of the several states that allegedly did NOT vote to ratify the 16th Amendment challenged the alleged ratification?"

That's a rhetorical question, right? The windfall to states's bureacrats from the Centralized Federal Government bureacrats is staggering.