Exploring the destruction of liberty

“ In regard to the Fourteenth Amendment, which the present Supreme Court of the United States has by decision chosen as a basis for invading the rights and the prerogative of the sovereign states, . . . “

Supreme Court of Utah, March 22, 1968

Gerald J. Dyett v. John W. Turner

The 14^th Amendment is arguably the most misunderstood of all of the amendments following the first ten. What does the Utah High court mean, or refer to, with its bold statement? It means, plainly, that the 14^th Amendment in its current application(s), at least by 1968, which is not exactly ancient history, is being used to destroy the rights and Constitutional powers of the sovereign states. This is a remarkable statement, one that might be expected to emanate from the lips of a wild-eyed right wing anti-government type -- certainly not from a body as distinguished and learned as the Utah Supreme Court.

To obtain a grasp of the court’s meaning we must examine another statement made by the United States Supreme Court, one made just five years after the creation of the 14^th Amendment.

“The rights of Citizens of the States, as such, are not under consideration in the fourteenth amendment. They (the rights of the state citizens of the state) stand as they did before the adoption of the fourteenth amendment and are fully guaranteed by other provisions.” United States v. 24 Federal Cases (1873) emphasis mine.

Prior to the 14^th Amendment there existed two citizenship statuses in America; the natural born citizen and the naturalized citizen. Both of these statuses originated in the states. A person was first a citizen of a sovereign state and ipso facto, citizens of the United States by virtue of the nexus between the states and their agent the United States. The “other provisions” spoken of are the provisions of the Constitution for the United States of America. If the state citizens are protected by the Constitution of the Unites States, but the 14^th amendment does not take these citizens into consideration with it’s articulation of rights, then who, or better asked, what citizen is the 14^th Amendment considering? The answer to this question is the crux of the Utah Supreme Court’s statement.

I will reach into this topic on the next blog post. Stay tuned.

Within striking distance,

The rattlesnake