[From "Fourteenth Amendment: Tool of Tyranny, but Was It Legally Ratified?"]

The ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment[…]is widely regarded as a momentous event in American history. However, many noted constitutional scholars and historians have highlighted persistent and perplexing issues about the legality of its ratification[…]
I will take space to share with you a bit of “chicanery” in the U.S. Senate that casts considerable doubt on that body’s vote to approve the Fourteenth Amendment[…]

One of the fifty non-southern senators was the newly elected John P. Stockton of New Jersey, an outspoken opponent of the Fourteenth Amendment[…]After informal polls revealed that only thirty-three senators favored it[…]a motion was made not to seat Stockton[…]

To not be troubled by that story, one has to really want to live in a world where the Fourteenth Amendment is considered “law” and is used by Joe Biden to justify his student-loan bailout scheme, by Bernie Sanders to argue in favor of raising the debt ceiling, and by five Supreme Court justices in forcing same-sex marriage on every state in the union. Do you want to live in that world?

One of the primary arguments challenging the legality of the Fourteenth Amendment’s ratification lies in the questionable legitimacy of the Southern states’ ratifications[…]Southern states were placed under military control[…]Reconstruction Acts forced them to ratify the Fourteenth Amendment to regain representation in Congress[…]
If the states that seceded were required to ratify an amendment in order to become states, how could they ratify, considering they weren’t states until they ratified the Fourteenth Amendment?[…]
Kentucky, Delaware, Maryland, California, Ohio, New Jersey, and Oregon rescinded their ratifications[…]
Congress simply rejected the rescissions[…]
Fourteenth Amendment has been the tool that tyrants have used to construct much of the unconstitutional machinery