Reflections on the 14th Amendment Sec IV

[palani]

Section. 4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

Most everyone presumes that the insurrection talked about above was the Civil War. Why?

When a person desires to separate their affairs from their spouse they file a similar financial notice in a public newspaper. This has the effect of permitting each to go their separate ways

This amendment was presumed passed in 1868. The Civil War ended three years previously. What is the effect in Law of publishing a legal notice after the fact of expenses incurred? It would be my guess that the expenses incurred are still owed. All expenses after the date of the public notice become subject to the conditions stated in the notice. So I would guess Section IV does not apply to the Civil War period but to future expenses.

Is it reasonable to assume that the de jure United States was separating its' financial condition from the de facto system being set up post Civil War? In other words, the hugh national debt being compiled these days is on the back of the current government (federal and state) and not on the Constitutional government as the current system is in insurrection with the old?

Comments?

[weishaupt1776]

The rebellion and insurrection is the ones who have accepted an unlawful citizenship status (US), hich amounts to allegiance to a foreign power. This creates a rebellion towards the dejure state government, thus a quiet war

So all of the debt the US incurs is applied towards "U.S. Citizen/rebels/insurrectionist/denizens" and cannot be questioned by such people

You hear all of these Tax protestors piss and moan about the 16th Amendment, while they are really getting you w/sec 4 of the 14th Amendment

[Shoonra]

This section has NEVER been the center of litigation, so there is no court decision about it.

But the debates in Congress on the proposed 14th Amendment make clear that "aid of insurrection or rebellion" was meant to include the southern Confederacy in the Civil War.

This meant that altho the US govt was going to spend money rebuilding the South, it was not going to pay off the expenses and debts run up by the Confederate government, including pensions to Confederate soldiers (the Veterans Administration has never extended benefits to Confederate vets or their widows, altho many - maybe all - states that made up the Confederacy has sent them money out of state funds). Nor, of course, would the US govt redeem or exchange Confederate currency.
Additionally, the section made it clear that former slave-owners were not going to get any compensation for their freed slaves.

THe last half-sentence of this section says all such debts and claims are illegal and void. I am not sure, but I think it means that not only would the US govt not pay those debts, but the suppliers, lenders, and other creditors of the Confederate govt were without any means for suing anyone or anything to recover their money.

As I said, this has not been the subject of any litigation, so we don't have any court's explication of the section.

By the way, it was proposed by Congress on June 13, 1866, approximately 14 months after the last battle of the Civil War. It received the last ratification necessary to adopt it on July 9, 1868.

[weishaupt1776]

Originally Posted by Shoonra

But the debates in Congress on the proposed 14th Amendment make clear that "aid of insurrection or rebellion" was meant to include the southern Confederacy in the Civil War.
By the way, it was proposed by Congress on June 13, 1866, approximately 14 months after the last battle of the Civil War.

Okay, but the first proclamation of peace was by Andrew Johnson April 2 , 1866 and then August (20th?) of 1866

There was no rebellion or insurrection after the War Between The States, and most states, except Texas declared the secession void and adopted the 13th Amendment as lawfully standing governments.

Originally Posted by Shoonra

It received the last ratification necessary to adopt it on July 9, 1868.

It received ratification under the color of law by disenfranchising state citizens through unauthorized military powers via the Reconstruction acts.
A new body politic of "Federal citizens" was formed in each state who colorably ratified the 14th at Gunpoint.

Anyway, I digress. The 14th is pretty clear that United States citizens (as setforth in sec 1) cannot question the public debt

As long as one has not rebutted the presumption of this "federal citizenship" while going up against the IRS, it is very easy for a Judge to take silent judicial notice of sec 4 of the 14th

[NaciremaDream]

Thank you for your time in going over this... i've focuse on section 2 alot... this is Much appreciated

Originally Posted by palani

Most everyone presumes that the insurrection talked about above was the Civil War. Why?

When a person desires to separate their affairs from their spouse they file a similar financial notice in a public newspaper. This has the effect of permitting each to go their separate ways

This amendment was presumed passed in 1868. The Civil War ended three years previously. What is the effect in Law of publishing a legal notice after the fact of expenses incurred? It would be my guess that the expenses incurred are still owed. All expenses after the date of the public notice become subject to the conditions stated in the notice. So I would guess Section IV does not apply to the Civil War period but to future expenses.

Is it reasonable to assume that the de jure United States was separating its' financial condition from the de facto system being set up post Civil War? In other words, the hugh national debt being compiled these days is on the back of the current government (federal and state) and not on the Constitutional government as the current system is in insurrection with the old?

Comments?

[Codee]

Originally Posted by palani

Most everyone presumes that the insurrection talked about above was the Civil War. Why?

I do not see "the" insurection. They are not talking about any "one" rebelion or insurection.

[mrg]

I am curious about "silent notice," can one request a "judge' to clarify all notice he takes,
and not take "silent notice" of anything?

That would seem to be in the nature of secret court proceedings.

[Codee]

Should be in the court record. Else how will judge proove he did so later?

[palani]

Codee posted

I do not see "the" insurection. They are not talking about any "one" rebelion or insurection.

There is too much coincidence that 'An Act Concerning The Rights of American citizens in Foreign States' was passed into law the evening before the 14th amendment passed. In this act the right of expatriation was officially recognized. http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage...db&recNum=2018

The foreign states referred to are the states comprising the union. The federal government never really had citizens although all of the states recognized the concept of United States citizens. So now here comes the federal government declaring freed slaves and everyone within the United States to be United States citizens. The United States consists only of the the District of Columbia and the territories and possessions. These are the states that consist of the United States, not the states that are foreign to the United States (Ohio, Virginia and so on). By error you may presume that you are within the United States when you are actually within a foreign country, not a possession or territory of the United States.

If you know you have the right to turn down the provisions of the 14th amendment and to expatriate to your own country and you do not, you are in insurrection to your own government and to the U.S. constitution. This is the de facto system set up by the 14th amendment, in which state governments share the same body politic with the federal government.

[weishaupt1776]

Originally Posted by mrg

\
That would seem to be in the nature of secret court proceedings.

Welcome to the U.S.S.A