Replies

"I think most everyone would agree that the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment prevents gender-based discrimination by the government. "

I think you undercut your own argument... why do we imagine the 14th amendment stops gender-based discrimination? It doesnt!! that is just an invention of recent USSC decision and legal theories. And then even "Conservative" Judges get locked into bogus precedents.

The fact that VMI and other institutions have had to change on the basis of the 14th is an abomination.

"But what you've got to understand is that so-called "textualists" or "originalists" simply don't exist. "

Not when we keep sending Commies like Justice Ginsburg on to the Supreme Court. Yet it is more than possible to have a valid legal philosophy that says "just go by the text as written and intended by the authors". IN fact, that is the *only* valid legal philosophy that maintains adherence to the most important judicial principle - Rule of Law.

" So much so, in fact, that there were women jailed in several states for attempting to vote after the 14th Amendment was passed, and their sentences were upheld by the Supreme Court. " And rightly so as the 19th amendment gave them the vote, not the 14th. To give them the vote on the basis of the 14th, when there are explicit wording that make it clear it is not intended to so extend the franchise, would make a mockery of the law.

Yet we use the 14th to do so much more. The point is, the Feminist moement wrongly got via Judicial tyranny/usurpation what they failed to do via proper channels, ie, the ERA. They have twisted the words of the 14th - wrongly.

Just because "everybody does it" doesnt make it right!

I think you misunderstood my argument. I am not an advocate of the "textualists" or the "originalists" at all. I'm not quite the free-wheeling "find anything you want in there" of some of today's judges, but if I had to pick a Justice with which I shared the most common view of the Constitution, it would be Hugo Black.

But back to the 14th for a moment.

So let's say your state passes a law stating that no women are allowed to attend any state accredited schools. State constitutions aside for the moment, do you honestly contend that the young ladies of this state would have no federal constitutional rememdy, since the 14th's original intent was not to protect women?