
They are twisting the 14th Amendment out of shape
His writings and speeches are critical to understanding the current implementation of the most important provision of the U.S. Constitution.
Just a month after the ratification of the 13th Amendment in December 1865, Langston spoke about the interpretations by several attorneys general that African-Americans could not be citizens. As the first Black person to address the Missouri legislature on Jan. 9, 1866, Langston said, 'Indeed, it has not been uncommon for distinguished officials, occupying high positions in the State and National Governments, to make the assertion that ours is and shall remain a white man's Government.'
However, he continued, that is not what the Founders decided. 'It was South Carolina that made the proposition, when the Articles of Confederation were under consideration in Congress, to insert the word 'white' between the words 'free' and 'inhabitants,' in the fourth article of that document, and make it read that 'the free white inhabitants of each of these States, paupers, vagabonds, and fugitives from justice excepted, shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of free citizens in the several States.'
Eleven States were called upon to vote on this proposition. Each State had one vote. Eight States voted against it, two States for it, and one State was divided in her vote. Thus, as early as 1778, with an unusual unanimity, our Fathers branded this word and set their seal of disapprobation upon the unjust discrimination which it imports.'
In fact, Langston notes that the franchise was available. 'When the Constitution was ratified, free colored men voted in a majority of all the States. They voted in New York, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, and North Carolina.'
Between 1812 and the Dred Scott decision, Langston decries a 'National apostacy in this matter.' He cited an 1843 ruling by Attorney General H.S. Legere that a Black applicant for land could not be considered a citizen.
Langston was leader of the Equal Rights League from 1864-1868, the political movement that shepherded the 14th Amendment. The 4 million Africans in the U.S. had the same issue that sparked the American Revolution — taxation without representation.
'It has always been our fortune to be held to a full discharge of all the obligations and duties which citizenship imposes, while it has ever been our misfortune to be denied well-nigh all the privileges, advantages, and rights, it naturally confers,' said Langston. 'We have been taxed and denied representation. We have paid to the government the full debt of our allegiance; and then we have been denied the protection due its defenders.'
The novel and contrived interpretation that the 14th Amendment bans use of race leaves out its role as repealing the Dred Scott decision. The same Congress that approved the 14th Amendment by two-thirds of both houses would charter the Freedmen's Bank and Howard University.
Sixteen civil rights acts since 1866 have underscored the covenant with African American citizens to realize the protections of the Constitution. Myriad congressional findings have confirmed that has not happened yet.
There is no equivalency between those institutions and the violent gangs proscribed in the three Force Acts during the 1870s. In fact, the Justice Department was founded in 1870 specifically to protect African-Americans from violent former Confederates.
On July 30, 1866, 200 Union Army veterans gathered in the Mechanics Institute in New Orleans to ponder a new state constitution. Former Confederates surrounded them and massacred them, an outrage which propelled the passage of the 14th Amendment.
Now the site of the Hotel Roosevelt, this spot is sacred for American democracy.
The military takeover of cities led by Black woman politicians such as Los Angeles and Washington, D.C. evokes the same echoes of New Orleans and the Wilmington, N.C. race riot of 1898 that unseated an elected Black city government. The currently contemplated Texas mid-decade redistricting scheme comes right out of the Black Codes playbook that sparked the Joint Reconstruction Committee.
All Americans need to heed the sage wisdom of Langston, who has provided a stable framework for democracy across the globe.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


San Francisco Chronicle
12 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Putin emerges from the Alaska summit with increased stature and Trump echoing a Kremlin position
In Alaska, President Vladimir Putin walked on a red carpet, shook hands and exchanged smiles with his American counterpart. Donald Trump ended the summit praising their relationship and calling Russia 'a big power ... No. 2 in the world,' albeit admitting they didn't reach a deal on ending the war in Ukraine. By Saturday morning Moscow time, Trump appeared to have abandoned the idea of a ceasefire as a step toward peace -– something he and Ukraine had pushed for months -– in favor of pursuing a full-fledged 'Peace Agreement" to end the war, echoing a long-held Kremlin position. The 'severe consequences' he threatened against Moscow for continuing hostilities were nowhere in sight. On Ukraine's battlefields, Russian troops slowly grinded on, with time on their side. The hastily arranged Alaska summit 'produced nothing for Mr. Trump and gave Mr. Putin most of what he was looking for,' said Laurie Bristow, a former British ambassador to Russia. The summit spectacle Putin's visit to Alaska was his first to the United States in 10 years and his first to a Western country since invading Ukraine in 2022 and plunging U.S.-Russia relations to the lowest point since the Cold War. Crippling sanctions followed, along with efforts to shun Russia on the global stage. In another major blow, the International Criminal Court in 2023 issued an arrest warrant against Putin on accusations of war crimes, casting a shadow on his foreign trips and contacts with other world leaders. Trump's return to the White House appeared to upend all that. He warmly greeted Putin, even clapping for him, on a red carpet as U.S. warplanes flew overhead as the world watched. The overflight was both 'a show of power' and a gesture of welcome from the U.S. president to the Kremlin leader, 'shown off to a friend,' said retired Col. Peer de Jong, a former aide to two French presidents and author of 'Putin, Lord of War.' Russian officials and media reveled in the images of the 'pomp-filled reception' and 'utmost respect' that Putin received in Alaska. Putin has 'broken out of international isolation,' returning to the world stage as one of two global leaders and 'wasn't in the least challenged' by Trump, who ignored the arrest warrant for Putin from the ICC, Bristow told The Associated Press. For Putin, 'mission accomplished' Putin 'came to the Alaska summit with the principal goal of stalling any pressure on Russia to end the war,' said Neil Melvin, director of international security at the London-based Royal United Services Institute. 'He will consider the summit outcome as mission accomplished.' In recent months, Trump has pressed for a ceasefire, something Ukraine and its allies supported and insisted was a prerequisite for any peace talks. The Kremlin has pushed back, however, arguing it's not interested in a temporary truce -– only in a long-term peace agreement. Moscow's official demands for peace so far have remained nonstarter for Kyiv: It wants Ukraine to cede four regions that Russia only partially occupies, along with the Crimean Peninsula, illegally annexed in 2014. Ukraine also must renounce its bid to join NATO and shrink its military, the Kremlin says. After Alaska, Trump appeared to echo the Kremlin's position on a ceasefire, posting on social media that after he spoke to Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and European leaders, 'it was determined by all that the best way to end the horrific war between Russia and Ukraine is to go directly to a Peace Agreement, which would end the war, and not a mere Ceasefire Agreement, which often times do not hold up.' In a statement after the Trump call, the European leaders did not address whether a peace deal was preferable to a ceasefire. The pro-Kremlin tabloid Komsomolskaya Pravda described it as a 'huge diplomatic victory' for Putin, whose forces will have time to make more territorial gains. The summit took place a week after a deadline Trump gave the Kremlin to stop the war or face additional sanctions on its exports of oil in the form of secondary tariffs on countries buying it. Trump already imposed those tariffs on India, and if applied to others, Russian revenues 'would probably be impacted very badly and very quickly,' said Chris Weafer, CEO of Macro-Advisory Ltd. consultancy. In the days before Alaska, Trump also threatened unspecified 'very severe consequences' if Putin does not agree to stop the war. But whether those consequences will materialize remains unclear. Asked about it in a post-summit interview with Fox News Channel, Trump said he doesn't need 'to think about that right now,' and suggested he might revisit the idea in 'two weeks or three weeks or something.' Alexandra Prokopenko of the Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center and a former adviser at the Russian Central Bank, posted on X that it was 'an important tactical victory for Putin' that gives Moscow 'an opportunity to build alternatives and be prepared.' More pressure on Ukraine In a statement after the summit, Putin claimed the two leaders had hammered out an 'understanding' on Ukraine and warned Europe not to 'torpedo the nascent progress.' But Trump said 'there's no deal until there's a deal.' In his Fox interview, Trump insisted the onus going forward might be on Zelenskyy 'to get it done,' but said there would also be some involvement from European nations. Zelenskyy will meet Trump at the White House on Monday. Both raised the possibility of a trilateral summit with Putin, but Kremlin aide Yuri Ushakov said it wasn't discussed in Alaska. The Kremlin has long maintained that Putin would only meet Zelenskyy in the final stages of peace talks. 'Trump now appears to be shifting responsibility towards Kyiv and Europe, while still keeping a role for himself,' Tatiana Stanovaya of the Carnegie Russia and Eurasia Center wrote on X. Fiona Hill, a senior adviser on Russia in his first administration, told AP that Trump has met his match because 'Putin is a much bigger bully.' Trump wants to be the negotiator of 'a big real estate deal between Russia and Ukraine,' she said, but in his mind he can 'apply real pressure' only to one said — Kyiv. Hill said she expects Trump to tell Zelenskyy that 'you're really going to have to make a deal' with Putin because Trump wants the conflict off his plate and is not prepared to put pressure on the Russian president. Far from the summit venue and its backdrop saying 'Pursuing Peace,' Russia continued to bombard Ukraine and make incremental advances on the over 600-mile (1,000-kilometer) front. Russia fired a ballistic missile and 85 drones overnight. Ukraine shot down or intercepted 61 drones, its air force said. Front-line areas of Sumy, Dnipropetrovsk, Donetsk and Chernihiv were attacked. Russia's Defense Ministry said it had taken control of the village of Kolodyazi in the Donetsk region, along with Vorone in the Dnipropetrovsk region. Ukraine did not comment on the claims. Russian forces are closing in on the strongholds of Pokrovsk and Kostiantynivka in the Donetsk region, which Moscow illegally annexed in 2022 but still only partially controls. 'Unless Mr. Putin is absolutely convinced that he cannot win militarily, the fighting is not going to stop," said Bristow, the former ambassador. "That's the big takeaway from the Anchorage summit.' ——


Newsweek
13 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Map Shows Tax Cuts Promised by Trump Administration Across 50 States
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. The Tax Foundation, a nonpartisan Washington-based think tank, has produced a map forecasting the effects of President Donald Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill Act on taxes across the United States, broken down to the county level. The White House's website reposted the map, noting that the Tax Foundation said Trump's package would "reduce federal taxes on average for individual taxpayers in every state" and create almost 1 million jobs. Newsweek contacted the Tax Foundation for comment on Saturday outside regular office hours. Why It Matters Trump signed his One Big Beautiful Bill, the centerpiece of his economic agenda, into law on July 4 after it narrowly passed both the House and Senate. The Congressional Budget Office has said the legislation will add $2.4 trillion to the U.S. national debt, a forecast that contributed to a falling out between Trump and his previous close confidant Elon Musk. The One Big Beautiful Bill included sweeping tax cuts, reduced spending on Medicaid, and additional funding for the military and border security. It also raised the U.S. debt ceiling by $5 trillion. What To Know On Wednesday, the Tax Foundation published a study forecasting the effects of the One Big Beautiful Bill on taxes paid by the average American on a county-by-county basis between 2026 and 2035. This was accompanied by a map showing the breakdown by county over this period. Two days later, the White House published a news release welcoming the study, which included a screenshot of the Tax Foundation's map taken for 2026. According to the Tax Foundation, the average tax cut per American for 2026 will be $3,752 because of Trump's spending package. This is forecast to fall to $2,505 in 2030 as some measures expire before increasing again to $3,301 in 2035. A map produced by the Tax Foundation showing the effects of President Donald Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill in 2026 on a county-by-county basis. A map produced by the Tax Foundation showing the effects of President Donald Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill in 2026 on a county-by-county basis. Tax Foundation The states forecast to see the largest tax cuts in 2926 are Wyoming ($5,375), Washington ($5,372) and Massachusetts ($5,139). By contrast, the smallest cuts are expected in West Virginia and Mississippi—at $2,503 and $2,401, respectively. In its report, the Tax Foundation described the One Big Beautiful Bill as "the most significant legislative changes to federal tax policy since the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act," which was passed in Trump's first term. The president's One Big Beautiful Bill contained a number of tax cuts, including extending corporation and income taxes he imposed in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. It also raises the cap on state and local tax deductions over the next five years to $40,000 for those making less than $500,000 per year, reduces tax on tips and overtime pay, and phases out some of former President Joe Biden's energy tax credits. The Tax Foundation also projected that the One Big Beautiful Bill would produce about 938,000 jobs "over the long run," including 132,000 in California and 81,000 in Texas. What People Are Saying White House deputy press secretary Anna Kelly said in the news release: "President Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill is the largest, most consequential tax cut on the middle class ever. Now, the Tax Foundation—the leading nonpartisan tax policy nonprofit—confirms that. Between lower inflation, massive investments, and historic tax cuts, all Americans are reaping the benefits of the Trump Economy—and the Golden Age has just begun." What Happens Next While supporters of Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill may be buoyed by the Tax Foundation's report, which suggests it will result in widespread tax reductions and job creation, critics are likely to continue raising concerns about its effects on the national debt and Medicaid cuts.

Engadget
42 minutes ago
- Engadget
Court blocks FTC investigation into Media Matters' alleged scheme against X
The court has blocked the Federal Trade Commission's investigation into Media Matters, the media nonprofit that previously published research showing that ads appeared on X alongside neo-Nazi and other antisemitic content. In 2023, Elon Musk's X filed a lawsuit against the media watchdog following an advertiser exodus. It accused Media Matters of "knowingly and maliciously manufactur[ing] side-by-side images depicting advertisers' posts on X Corp.'s social media platform beside Neo-Nazi and white national fringe content." Just this May, the FTC started looking into whether the nonprofit violated antitrust laws by allegedly colluding with advertising and advocacy groups to boycott X. In June, Media Matters sued the FTC, accusing it of unfairly targeting the group in retaliation for past criticisms of X. "The Federal Trade Commission seeks to punish Media Matters for its journalism and speech in exposing matters of substantial public concern — including how has enabled and profited from extremist content that proliferated after Elon Musk took over the platform formerly known as Twitter," the group said at the time. Now, Judge Sparkle L. Sooknanan has granted a preliminary injunction in the nonprofit's favor. Sooknanan has agreed with the group that the FTC's investigation is "a retaliatory act" and has noted that it is "likely to succeed on its First Amendment retaliation claim." She wrote in her decision that such probes would deter other reporters from speaking again. "Indeed, the FTC's [investigation] has had its intended effect." Apparently, because of the probe, Media Matters has "decided against pursuing certain stories about the FTC, Chairman Ferguson, and Mr. Musk." "The court's ruling demonstrates the importance of fighting over folding, which far too many are doing when confronted with intimidation from the Trump administration," Angelo Carusone, the president of Media Matters, told The New York Times . "We will continue to stand up and fight for the First Amendment rights that protect every American." As the publication notes, courts had also blocked investigations into the group by the attorneys general in Texas and Missouri. Musk's lawsuits against the nonprofit, however, are still ongoing.