From: CZ94@MUSICA.MCGILL.CA (CZ94)
Newsgroups: can.politics,soc.culture.canada
Subject: RE: Individual Rights in the U.S. Constitution (was Re: Individu
Date: 12 Oct 92 21:17:22 GMT
Organization: McGill University

In article <1bandsINNnca@iskut.ucs.ubc.ca> mathew@unixg.ubc.ca (Mathew B Englander) writes:
>svanegmo@zeno01.math.UWaterloo.ca (Stephen Van Egmond) wrote:
>>>>To take an example from American history, consider the time when blacks were
>>>>slaves, and were treated as non-people.  The objective of accepting them fully
>>>>into American society was acoomplished, not by inserting a clause into their
>>>>constitution specifically granting blacks 'collective' rights of some sort.
>>>>It was accomplished by actually following what their constitution already said
>>>>(or even, implied).
>
>I (mathew@unixg.ubc.ca; Mathew Englander) wrote:
>>>You've got it exactly backwards. The 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments
>>>to the U.S. Constitution specifically entrench the rights of blacks.
>>>Even with these amendments, blacks are far from "equal"; it's scary
>>>to think what the U.S. would be like without the amendments.
>
>robinc@bnr.ca (Frank) writes:
>>>Please write out these amendments.
>
>Here they are. As background, recall that the U.S. Civil War lasted
>from 1861 to 1865.
>
>  AMENDMENT XIII [1865]
>   Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a
>punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted,
>shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their
>jurisdiction.
>   Section 2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by
>appropriate legislation.
>
>  AMENDMENT XIV [1868]
>   Section 1. 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 2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several
>States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number
>of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the
>right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for
>President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives
>in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the
>members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male
>inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens
>of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation
>in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein
>shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male
>citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one
>years of age in such State.
>   [Sections 3 and 4 omitted]
>   Section 5. The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by
>appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.
>  
>  AMENDMENT XV [1870]
>   Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote
>shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any
>State on account of race, color, or previous condition of
>servitude--
>   Section 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article
>by appropriate legislation. 
>
I don't see _anywhere_ in these amendments where it "specifically
entrenches the rights of blacks," as Matthew claims.  These
amendments apply to *all* Americans.  It is no doubt true that
the intent of these amendments was mainly to ensure greater rights
for blacks, but they do not set blacks up as a distinct class of
people with special rights.  In this respect, theses amendments are
quite different from the proposed amendments to the Canadian
constitution concerning aboriginal people.

Tom Box
CZ94@MUSICA.MCGILL.CA