The Legal "Gap" of The Fourteenth Amendment Pertaining to Citizenless Citizens: An "Uncertain Status"

Recent Republican efforts to discredit Kamala Harris due to "questions" about her "citizenship" not only makes them look petty, it also raises a troubling legal issue that has always concerned me.

I start my day, which often merges from the night before, with reading. Not coffee, not bacon and eggs (gross), not a cigarette, not a joint or any other smokables. Not writing, not television, not exercise or yoga. I read articles from the so-called Main Stream Media (MSM), RT, Al-Jazeera, CGTN and a plethora of others. I read about two to three hours upon rising; assuming I have been blessed with the supine position, as in sleep, prior to.

I read, I do not “watch” unless it is uniquely profound in a real time sense. As my grandmother was wont to state: “I don’t want nothing that I have to watch, unless it’s a watch.” My academic guru and goddess was a lesbian by the name of Jane Hansen (wife of famous gay author Joe Hansen). Mrs. Hansen truly believed that television was a scourge upon collective intellect. She disaffectedly, and with utter contempt, called it “the idiot box.”

It has been half of a century since she uttered those words to me. In that time, I have not only not found grounds to challenge her prescience, I have found grounds to substantiate it. Ergo, it is no wonder that most “Americans” read very little (those that can) and get their information through “videos.” But, alas, I mildly digress. Hansen

Recently, I read an intriguing article at Hartmann Report.com. The piece explored the Supreme Court’s notorious, and quite telling, Dred Scott decision and its implications pertinent to the citizenship of Black People in the United States. The article haunted me due to its exhumation of a matter that has always caused me concern regarding the “citizenship” of Black People in the United States from a legal standpoint. Hartmann Report on Harris' "Citizenship".

The Constitution does not mention slavery until 1865, with the adoption of the Thirteenth Amendment, which allegedly abolished the institution. In a troubling irony, if not contradiction, Abraham Lincoln signed the hallowed Emancipation Proclamation two years prior, in 1863. Yet the Constitution, written in 1787, is riddled with provisions tied to slavery which protected it without naming it. Once again, and forevermore, I will state that until the aggregate population in the United States understands the power of language, especially Black People in the United States, they will forever be enslaved.

The narrative is the field on which the game is played in white supremacy football. If you do not understand language and how it is manipulated you are precluded from comprehending the narrative and, thusly, forming your own. One cannot counter that which they do not comprehend. One can provide neither offense nor defense to that which they cannot comprehend. Spend a day in your local courtroom and you will comprehend what you do not comprehend. Comprehensively speaking.

In the United States, enslaved people were legally considered property, not citizens, and were denied any semblance of humanity let alone many so-called rights. Enslaved people were not recognized as human beings but as property that could be mortgaged, traded, bought, sold, used as collateral, given as a gift and disposed of violently. Pay close attention to the words “were not recognized” if you do nothing else. Because, legally, it can vigorously be argued that “were not” never transitioned to “are.”

I shall now explain.

In the1857 Dred Scott v. Sanford decision, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that enslaved people were not citizens, but were instead "a separate class of persons.” That same court also ruled that slaves had no right to sue, and slavers could not be deprived of their property without due process of law. A fact codified in the Fourteenth Amendment.

The Fourteenth Amendment

Section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment states that “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 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment states that “no person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.”

Emancipation

The etymology of the term emancipate originates in the Latin with the “E” relating to the Latin word exterus, which means "out," plus manus which means "hand," and cip from the Latin verb "to take." Put it together, and you have "to be taken out of someone's hands" — a good definition of freedom; at least in theory. This is why your founding fathers spoke of “liberty” as opposed to “freedom.”

Thomas Jefferson said "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.” He did not state the tree of freedom. Patrick Henry said “Give me liberty, or give me death.” He did not state give me freedom, or give me death. Ellis Island is home to the Statue of Liberty, not the Statue of Freedom. The European, unlike enslaved Alkebulanians, was in no one else’s “hands.” Thusly, they were far more concerned with liberty. Liberty Versus Freedom

When did we, legally, become “persons?” What legal process, what adjudication migrated us from property to persons? Where is it written"? Technically, this legal “gap” (as I refer to it) was never bridged. It is totally assumptive at best and inferred at least. There is nothing, legally speaking, that nullifies our status as “property.”

The legal status of “property” is unique to BPITUS (Black People in the United States) No other so-called “American” has ever had this psychosocial and legal albatross around their necks, so to speak. Think about the societal effects of this and you will become dizzied at the dysfunction. How can a society, unique in this way, separate itself from the reality of this status to what occurs today? Does this legal gap explain why this “property,” lo 500 years later, gets the worst this society has to offer substantiated by its own statistics and metrics?

If one considers what I am presenting in this disquisition, my query does explain quite a bit. It explains why day after day, week after week, month after month and year after year there are incessant police killings of BPITUS. A fact made even more stark considering that policing in the United States originated from “slave patrols.” It explains why the amendment preceding the fourteenth one (the Thirteenth Amendment) legalizes slavery of incarcerated individuals and disproportionately those individuals look just like the original slaves. Slavery is quite legal, still, in the United States.

It explains why Jim Crow laws required separate facilities for BPITUS. No separate facilities for Asians, Original Americans, Latinos, Arabs, or Eskimos. It explains why even other “people of color” will refer to a BPITUS as a “nigger” in a heartbeat. It explains why we rank lowest in literacy, familial wealth, home ownership and governmental representation. It explains why even though European-American/white women have the highest breast cancer incidence rate in the United States, Black women have a higher death rate from breast cancer than European/white women even though they have a lower incidence rate. It explains why Black Men in the United States have the shortest life expectancy of any other demographic in the United States. It explains why we rank number one in heart disease and hypertension.

It also explains why the United States has never formally “apologized” for slavery. After all, why apologize to your refrigerator? Or your garage? Or your clothing? One would likely apologize to one’s dog first, for even a dog knows the difference between being stumbled over and being kicked.

Abraham Lincoln was revolted by the mere thought of BPITUS holding office, being jurors, interracial marriage and such; he was quite vocal about it. When this temperament which was present in all of your founding fathers is considered in conjunction with the nebulous legal standing of the Scott Decision and the legal gap which makes the Fourteenth Amendment problematic, the result is an inferred predominance in terms of legal thought and precedent. That’s just the truth.

What is it that defines being a person? Some say that it is intelligence, the capacity to speak a language, creativity, the ability to make moral judgments, consciousness, free will, a soul, and self-awareness. The definitions are many. However, whatever definition one adheres to, that designation of “personhood” was never legally assigned, by the United States, to its only “citizens” that are legally “property.” Ergo, we are citizenless-citizens in a considerable sense and no one should be surprised at the racist projections being bandied about by Republicans, and others, pertinent to Harris.

Am I missing something?

Or are you?