Washington Continues a Fact-Free Rant on 14th Amendment

Washington Continues a Fact-Free Rant on 14th Amendment April 24, 2013

Ellis Washington is still ranting incoherently about the 14th Amendment and the incorporation of the Bill of Rights against the states. Now he’s complaining that freedom of speech and of the press can’t be violated by state and local governments due to evil liberals and the 14th Amendment. And saying bizarre things like this:

In addition, it is essential to realize that the First Amendment, like virtually all of the Bill of Rights, was not applicable to state governments until 1925 and to apply their substantive guarantees through the 14th Amendment, a process that did not begin until Fabian socialism and progressive radicalism crept into the Supreme Court beginning with Gitlow v. New York (1925) (ruling that the 14th Amendment extended the reach of certain limitations on federal government authority set forth in the First Amendment – specifically the provisions protecting freedom of speech and freedom of the press – to the governments of the individual states).

This pattern of leftist judicial activism from the bench would increase exponentially during the FDR/Truman eras (1933-53) as FDR’s bought-and-paid-for “New Deal” Supreme Court began out of whole cloth to create and propagate the so-called “incorporation doctrine” in many of its judicial decrees, starting with the infamous Footnote 4 of Carolene Products v. U.S. (1938) and going viral in Korematsu v. U.S. (1944) (holding that Japanese, Italians and Germans be placed in internment camps based on FDR’s Order 9066 during World War II).

Say what? Korematsu had nothing to do with the 14th Amendment; it involved purely federal action. And the notion that the ruling upholding the internment of the Japanese was “leftist judicial activism” is utter nonsense. Who are more likely to support locking up a racial minority on the specious grounds that they are a threat to national security, liberals or conservatives?

This logically applies to the First Amendment by considering, for example, that until Gitlow, progressives hated the fact that Southern states before the Civil War outlawed pro-abortion literature; many states levied and collect taxes on behalf of state-sponsored churches and religious education; newspapers frequently were prohibited from publishing stories criticizing industry or certain connected political leaders because such speech was deemed seditious and consequently subject to prior restraint; and public protests regarding unpopular people or issues were repeatedly proscribed by state breach of peace laws.

Enter Pandora’s box – 40 years after Gitlow, in the 1960s, the Supreme Court began pushing its Darwinian, atheistic, progressive, anti-constitutional agenda and unleashed a nine-man sexual revolution using the incorporation doctrine to pervert the sexual mores of American society first in Griswold v. Connecticut (1965), which was based in part on the right of married couples to make decisions about contraception. Next was Roe v. Wade (1973) (legalized genocide of the pre-born), Lawrence v. Texas (2005) (legalized sodomy) and Hollingsworth v. Perry (2013) (Court will rule in June on whether same-sex marriage is lawful in all 50 states under Equal Protection grounds).

Whiskey tango foxtrot? He admits that the states routinely violated those rights that he claims to believe are inalienable — punishing free speech, forcing people to pay taxes to support churches they do not belong to, censoring newspapers and outlawing public protests — and then claims that preventing that from happening was part of a “Darwinian, atheistic, progressive, anti-constitutional agenda.” This is completely incoherent and contradictory. It’s too stupid to even be wrong.


Browse Our Archives