View Single Post
  #1  
Old 09-07-2018, 04:40 PM
UltraVires is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Bridgeport, WV, US
Posts: 15,184

The Fourteenth Amendment: What about Section 2?


I was watching the exchange yesterday between Sen. Hirono and Judge Kavanaugh about a case from Hawaii which struck down a vote which was to be conducted by only native Hawaiians. Kavanaugh stated that both the 14th and 15th amendments applied, because the 15th explicitly prohibits racial classifications on voting and the 14th Amendment "according to precedent" disallowed all restrictions based upon race.

I have mentioned this before and it does seem to be Supreme Court precedent. But how has the Court possibly reached this result?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Amendment XIV
Section 1.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Section 2.
Representatives shall be apportioned among the several states according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each state, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the executive and judicial officers of a state, or the members of the legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such state, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such state.
Section One is always talked about, especially with regard to equal protection and due process. However, Section Two explicitly says that Supreme Court precedent is absolutely wrong. A state may prohibit the vote based upon race, subject to the penalty involved. It may prohibit the vote to women or children with no penalty.

It was therefore needed to pass the 15th amendment to prohibit a state from denying the vote based upon race, the 19th amendment to prohibit a state from denying the vote based upon gender, and the 26th amendment to a prohibit a state from denying the vote to those aged eighteen and above.

Why then, is the 14th amendment cited for such a font of rights when it explicitly allows such a denial and such unequal treatment?