citizens under the Constitution, not the Fourteenth Amendment

Similar documents
Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1 is defined to have both Fundamental as well as Common Privileges and Immunities

CORFIELD v. CORYELL. [4 Wash. C. C. 371.]

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

Slaughterhouse Cases

Yes, there were four citizens before the Fourteenth Amendment

The Slaughterhouse Cases

Citizenship and Domicile: Before and After the Fourteenth Amendment

AP US Government and Politics US Constitution Study

Jus Sanguinis is the rule for the United States; Jus Soli or Jus Sanguinis, or both, for the several States

CONTROLLING LEGAL PRINCIPLES Free Exercise Clause Decision The Contemplation of Justice McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 U.S. 4 Wheat.

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

Slaughterhouse Cases. Mr. Justice FIELD, dissenting:

Constitution Day September 17

BANK OF THE UNITED STATES V. DEVEAUX ET AL. [1 Hall, Law J. 263.] Circuit Court, D. Georgia. May Term,

D1 Constitution. Revised. The Constitution (1787) Timeline 2/28/ Declaration of Independence Articles of Confederation (in force 1781)

The Federal System. Multiple-Choice Questions. 1. In a system, local and regional governments derive authority from the national government.

Federalism - Balance Between Federal and State

The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the People of the several States.

Background Into Meeting At Seneca Falls in 1848

US Constitution. Articles I-VII

LAYING PRIVILEGES OR IMMUNITIES TO REST: MCDONALD V. CITY OF CHICAGO

Chapters 1-3 Test REVIEW CONSTITUTIONAL FOUNDATIONS PART 1

Justice Curtis's Dissent in Dred Scott. Excerpts

Primary Source Activity: Freedom, Equality, Justice, and the Social Contract Connecting Locke s Ideas to Our Founding Documents

U.S. History Final Exam - Review Guide Semester 1

Natural (Native) Born Citizen Defined: Before and After the Fourteenth Amendment

The Second Amendment, Incorporation and the Right to Self Defense

U.S. Federal Government & Budget

The year 1987 marks the 200th anniversary of the United. Reflections on the Bicentennial of the United States Constitution.

Constitution Scavenger Hunt Use the Constitution in your text to complete this. Article I- Branch writ of habeas corpus Article II- Branch

United States v. Guest 383 U.S. 745 page 763 Justice Harlan opinion

TEACHING AMERICAN HISTORY PROJECT The Constitution, Article I Kyra Kasperson

Melanie Lee, J.D. Candidate 2017

The Constitution. Structure and Principles

The Origins of political thought and the Constitution

REPORTED IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND. No SEPTEMBER TERM, 1994 DOLORES E. SCOTT COMPTROLLER OF THE TREASURY

The Judicial System (cont d)

Name: Class: Date: STUDY GUIDE - CHAPTER 03 TEST: Federalism

Federalism: Forging a Nation. Chapter 3

Lesson 14 THE CONSTITUTION, FEDERALISM, AND THE STATES. Lesson Objectives

Ohio Bill of Rights. 02 Right to alter, reform, or abolish government, and repeal special privileges (1851)

FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF CHESTERFIELD COUNTY Herbert C. Gill, Jr., Judge. This appeal involves a dispute between the Board of

1. The party favored a strong national government.

The Parameters of Constitutional Reconstruction: Slaughter-House, Cruikshank, and the Fourteenth Amendment

THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF PENNSYLVANIA HOUSE BILL AN ACT

The Struggle for Civil Liberties Part I

12.12 Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments. By Jackie Suarez, Joanne Kim, Kaitlynn Barbosa, Chenith Say, and Giselle Morales Period 5

Early US. Unit 3 Visuals

We the People of the United States,

PRIVELEGES, IMMUNITIES, AND FREE ENTERPRISE

IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

from the present case. The grant does not convey power which might be beneficial to the grantor, if retained by himself, or which can inure solely to

Chapter 11 and 12 - The Federal Court System

Indirect representation: when elected officials elect higher officials Interstate commerce: trade between states Legislature: a law making body of

Magruder s American Government

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA. WAYNE BOUYEA, : : Petitioner : : v. : CIVIL NO. 3:CV : MEMORANDUM

The Constitution of the United States of America What problems did the constitutional delegates face as they met in Philadelphia in 1787?

The United States Constitution & The Illinois Constitution. Study Guide

GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY SCHOOL of LAW

Name. Draft of the Articles SECTION ONE

IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Constitutional Foundations

STATE CITIZENSHIP CASEBOOK

STUDY GUIDE Chapter 04 TEST

Federal System at Work

Chapter 3: The Constitution

The Federal System. Multiple-Choice Questions. 1. The party favored a strong national government.

THE CONSTITUTION. PREAMBLE = Intro

South Carolina s Exposition Against the Tariff of 1828 By John C. Calhoun (Anonymously)

Federalism: the division of power.

The Legislative Branch

GOVERNMENT IN THE U.S.

Natural Resources Journal

3.1c- Layer Cake Federalism

Chief Justice Roger Taney and Justice Benjamin Curtis Dred Scott v Sandford (1857) [Abridged]

Dred Scott v. Sandford

ANSWER KEY EXPLORING CIVIL AND ECONOMIC FREEDOM DBQ: LIBERTY AND THE

POCKET CONSTITUTION BY: Father of the Constitution: Parts of the Constitution: #23 Gives. #24 Eliminates the. #25 Establishes the.

Introductory Terms/Concepts, Text of the EPC, Early Cases: Yick Wo v. Hopkins (1886) Plessy v. Ferguson (1896)

THE CONSTITUTIONAL REQUIREMENT OF UNIFORMITY IN DUTIES, IMPOSTS AND EXCISES

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE DIVISION CASE NO. 3:07-cv-424-RJC ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Chapter 4: The United States Constitution

Heightened Scrutiny And Gender

Chapters 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 of Edwards only (nothing from Ellis debate reader, and chapter 6 of Edwards will be on the next exam).

Guiding Principles of the Constitution (HAA)

Case 1:09-cv BLW Document 19 Filed 05/20/2009 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF IDAHO. MEMORANDUM DECISION vs.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA BRYSON CITY DIVISION 2:10cv9

USCH 1.7-Judicial Review

Do Foreign Corporations Have Rights?

THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF PENNSYLVANIA SENATE BILL INTRODUCED BY SCARNATI, CORMAN AND GORDNER, JANUARY 30, 2017 AN ACT

ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO FILE AMENDED COMPLAINT. Plaintiff Maurice E. Quinn is a prisoner in the custody of the Colorado

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND. No. 21. September Term, 2003 BRUCE LEVITT. FAX.COM, INC., et al.

THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF PENNSYLVANIA SENATE BILL INTRODUCED BY SCARNATI, CORMAN AND GORDNER, JANUARY 30, 2017

Magruder s American Government

July 29, Re: Supplement to the One Hundred Sixty-Second Report of the Rules Committee

The United States Constitution: Is It Still Working? (Your Name) Political Science 121. Professor Arns. March, 12, 2013

Some Institutional Background to the Rise of American Business Due process and contracts: One reason why this nation switched to a Constitution rather

How was each of these actually conservative in nature?

Big Ideas How can you make everyone happy? Checks and balances... what does that look like? How much power should anyone have?

Transcription:

Two citizens under the Constitution, citizens under the Constitution, and not the Fourteenth Amendment not the Fourteenth Amendment 2009 Dan Goodman <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> Author's Note: Citizenship under the Constitution was changed by the Fourteenth Amendment. Before the Fourteenth Amendment there was only one class of citizens under the Constitution of the United States. After the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment, the Supreme Court, in in the Slaughterhouse Cases, decided that there now were two separate and distinct citizens under the Constitution of the United States. _ v <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> Citizenship under the Constitution was changed by the Fourteenth Amendment. Before the Fourteenth Amendment there was only one class of citizens under the Constitution of the United States. After the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment, the Supreme Court, in in the Slaughterhouse Cases, decided that there now were two separate and distinct citizens under the Constitution of the United States. The Supreme court in the Slaughterhouse Cases states that Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1 is to be read as "The Citizens of each State shall be be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities OF (and not IN) the several states." [footnote 1] 1] (83 U.S. 38, at at page 75). In addition, at page 74, the Court states: "It is quite clear, then, that there is a citizenship of the United States, and a citizenship of a State, which are distinct from each other, and which depend upon different characteristics or circumstances in the individual. We think this distinction and its explicit recognition in this amendment of great weight in this argument, because the next paragraph of this same section, (first section, second clause) [footnote 2] which is the one mainly relied on by the plaintiffs in in error, speaks only of privileges and immunities of of citizens of of the United States, and does not speak of those of citizens of the several States." The Slaughterhouse court decided that the Fourteenth Amendment created two citizens

under the Constitution of the United States (and not the Fourteenth Amendment): a citizen of the United States, under the Fourteenth Amendment; and a citizen of the several States, under Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1. 1. [footnote 3] This was later reaffirmed in Cole v. Cunningham: "The intention of section 2, Article IV (of the Constitution), was to confer on the citizens of the several States a general citizenship." Cole v. Cunningham: 133 U.S. 107, at pages 113 thru 114 (1890). And, that Corfield v. Coryell, now relates to to a citizen of of the several states: "Fortunately we are not without judicial construction of this clause of the Constitution. The first and the leading case on the subject is is that of of Corfield v. Coryell, decided by Mr. Justice Washington in the Circuit Court for the District of Pennsylvania in 1823. 'The inquiry,' he says, 'is, what are the privileges and immunities of citizens OF the several States? We feel no hesitation in confining these expressions to those privileges and immunities which are fundamental; which belong of right to the citizens of all free governments, and which have at all times been enjoyed by citizens of the several States which compose this Union, from the time of their becoming free, independent, and sovereign. What these fundamental principles are, it would be more tedious than difficult to enumerate. They may all, however, be comprehended under the following general heads: protection by the government, with the right to acquire and possess property of every kind, and to pursue and obtain happiness and safety, subject, nevertheless, to such restraints as the government may prescribe for the general good of the whole.' " Slaughterhouse Cases: 83 83 U.S. 36, at at pages 75-76. [footnote 5] So Corfield before and after the Fourteenth Amendment relates to Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1 of the Constitution of the United States, but now it describes the privileges and immunities of a citizen of the several States, whereas before the Fourteenth Amendment, it it described privileges and immunities a citizen of one state had in another State. [footnote 6] Footnotes: [1] In In Maxwell v. v. Dow (176 U.S. 581 (1900), at at page 588), there is the following: A provision corresponding to this [Justice Miller (Slaughterhouse Cases)] found in the Constitution of the United States in section 2 of the fourth article, wherein it is provided that the citizens of each State shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens OF the several States.

[2] No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States. [3] This was done before the Slaughterhouse Cases (and after the adoption of the 14th Amendment) in the cases of Woodruff v. Parham (75 U.S. 123) and Hinson v. Lott (75 U.S. 148), both decided November 8, 1868. In these cases, Justice Miller [footnote 4] wrote in the Statement of the Case: The case being thus: The Constitution thus ordains: Congress shall have power to regulate commerce with foreign nations and among the several States. No State shall levy any imposts or duties on imports or exports. The citizens of of each State shall be entitled to all the immunities and privileges of citizens OF the several States. Statement of of the the Case, both cases, pages 123 and 148 respectively. [4] It It is is to to be be noted that Justice Miller, who wrote the majority opinions in in these two cases, wrote the majority opinions in in the Slaughterhouse Cases (83 U.S. 36) and Bradwell v. State of Illinois (83 U.S. 130). [5] In In Corfield v. v. Coryell, Justice Bushrod Washington, wrote: The inquiry is, what are the privileges and immunities of citizens IN the several States? We feel no hesitation in confining these expressions to those privileges and immunities which are, in their nature, fundamental; which belong, of right, to the citizens of all free governments; and which have, at all times, been enjoyed by the citizens of the several States which compose this Union, from the time of their becoming free, independent, and sovereign. What these fundamental principles are, it would perhaps be more tedious than difficult to enumerate. They may, however, be all comprehended under the following general heads: protection by the government; the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the right to to acquire and possess property of every kind, and to pursue and obtain happiness and safety; subject nevertheless to such restraints as the government may justly prescribe for the general good of the whole. The right of a citizen of one State to pass through, or to reside in any other State, for purposes of trade, agriculture, professional pursuits, or otherwise; to claim the benefit of the writ of habeas corpus; to institute and maintain actions of any kind in the courts of the State; to take, hold and dispose of property, either real or personal; and an exemption from higher taxes or impositions than are paid by the other citizens of the State; may be mentioned as some of the particular privileges and immunities of citizens, which are clearly embraced by the general description of privileges deemed to be fundamental; to which may be added, the elective franchise, as regulated and established by the laws or constitution of the State in which it is to be exercised. These, and many others which might be mentioned, are, strictly speaking, privileges and immunities, and the enjoyment of them by the citizens of each State, in every other State, was manifestly calculated (to use the expressions of the preamble of the corresponding provision in the old Articles of Confederation) the better to secure and perpetuate mutual friendship and intercourse among the people of the different States of the Union.

[6] Campbell v. Morris (3 (3 Harr. & McH., 535 Md. 1797) (Before the 14th Amendment): The object of the convention in introducing this clause into the constitution, was to invest the citizens of the different states with the general rights of citizenship; that they should not be foreigners, but citizens. To go thus far was essentially necessary to the very existence of a federate government, and in reality was no more than had been provided for by the first confederation in the fourth article.... The expressions, however, of the fourth article convey no such idea. It does not declare that the citizens of each state shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of the citizens OF the several states. Had such been the language of the constitution, it might, with more plausibility, have been contended that this act of assembly was in violation of it; but such are not the expressions of the article; it only says that The citizens of the several states shall be be entitled to to all privileges and immunities of citizens IN the several states. Thereby designing to give them the rights of citizenship, and not to put all the citizens of the United States upon a level. http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/a4_2_1s10.html Readings: Dan Goodman, Two Citizens Under the Constitution of the United States (http://www.jdsupra.com/post/documentviewer.aspx?fid=1b576684-aed8-4f2f-b663-529d35169c65) Dan Goodman, Diversity of Citizenship: Who is a Citizen of a State? (http://www.jdsupra.com/post/documentviewer.aspx?fid=97ed7a66-525b-4c65-ac84- f150253f2913) Dan Goodman, From Dred Scott to Slaughterhouse (http://www.jdsupra.com/post/documentviewer.aspx?fid=9d907fef-a73d-44a5-8b90-41dfe28f1fa2) Dan Goodman, Citizen of the several States _ Settled! (http://www.jdsupra.com/post/documentviewer.aspx?fid=0172afa1-e76c-42e1-a34f- 5c95de71f605) Dan Goodman, The Effects of the Fourteenth Amendment on the Constitution of the United States _ More (http://www.jdsupra.com/post/documentviewer.aspx?fid=545bf0b2-1126-40f4-8098- 27169f3d5cce)

Dan Goodman, The Effects of the Fourteenth Amendment on the Constitution of the United States (http://www.jdsupra.com/post/documentviewer.aspx?fid=fbd578ce-7cda-4fd7-a865-41ceb0839556) Dan Goodman, A Look At Corfield (On Citizenship) (http://www.jdsupra.com/post/documentviewer.aspx?fid=e781853b-af48-4c46-bb13-561f5be7d82b)