In case you missed it this morning, be sure to check out Prof. Gene Nichol’s fine essay in Raleigh’s News & Observer celebrating and explaining the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution as it arrives at its 15oth anniversary.
Here are some on-the money excerpts:
“This month marks the 150th anniversary of the ratification of the most consequential provision of the U.S. Constitution, the 14th Amendment. It grants citizenship to anyone born in America and assures that state governments afford due process and equal protection of the laws.
Rep. John Bingham, the enactment’s principal author, explained he sought ‘a simple, strong, plain declaration that equal laws and exact justice shall be secured within every state for any person, no matter whence he comes, or how poor, how weak, how simple, how friendless.’ The 14th Amendment, along with its civil war counterparts, sought to remedy the tragic defects of 1789 and bring egalitarian democracy to the United States.
Of course Bingham’s words have been much-ignored in our constitutional history. The 14th Amendment was largely gutted in its first 50 years – except as a tool for corporate interests. And Plessy v. Ferguson cruelly buried its central meaning.
But since 1954, the Supreme Court has frequently used the 14th Amendment to demand that American government make real its foundational promises. Brown v. Board of Education (school segregation), Loving v. Virginia (anti-miscegenation laws), Craig v. Boren (sex discrimination), Harper v. Virginia (voting rights), Goldberg v. Kelly (right to hearing), Roe v. Wade (reproductive rights), Graham v. Richardson (immigrant rights), Obergefell v. Hodges (gay rights) and Reynolds v. Sims (equal representation) are its principal markers. Without them, the U.S. would be a tyrannous nation. Anything but the land of the free. So it’s good to raise a glass to the old, but essential and defining, provision.”
After noting the repeated and ongoing efforts of conservative politicians like Donald Trump and North Carolina legislative leaders to undermine the amendment, Nichol concludes this way:
“But it’s also accurate to characterize the struggle as a continuing, never-yielding fight over Bingham’s 14th Amendment. The Tar Heel State initially voted against the amendment in 1866, for example, before eventually yielding to the pressures of the Reconstruction Congress. And the aggressive social and political agenda of today’s North Carolina Republican Party is impossible to square with the due process and equal protection mandates of the last half-century.
Our General Assembly has repeatedly moved, in every manner it could covertly construct, to restrict the political participation of black Tar Heels. It has boasted of its efforts to quash political electoral equity. The federal courts have found that their actions ‘disrespect, stigmatize and subordinate’ lesbians and gay men. And their anti-abortion handiwork had nothing to do with a woman’s health and everything to do with unconstitutional coercion. When the federal government sued over HB2, it noted ‘not long ago North Carolina had signs above restrooms keeping people out without a difference.’
Republican legislators passed a statute giving public officers a free hand to discriminate against gays. They moved to further racially segregate our schools. They continued the Democratic tradition of turning away undocumented dreamers from our universities. And they launched the nation’s boldest crusade against poor people. If John Bingham were alive today, they’d drum him out of the party.
As Faulkner put it: ‘The past is never dead. It’s not even past.’”