denied these privileges and immunities in
the State from which he emigrated, in the State to which he immigrates
he could not be discriminated against on account of his color under
the second section of the fourth article. Now, is it possible that
he gets additional rights by immigration? Is it possible that the
General Government is under a greater obligation to protect him in
a State of which he is not a citizen than in a State of which he
is a citizen? Must he leave home for protection, and after he has
lived long enough in the State to which he immigrates to become a
citizen there, must he again move in order to protect his rights?
Must one adopt the doctrine of peripatetic protection--the doctrine
that the Constitution is good only _in transitu_, and that when
the citizen stops, the Constitution goes on and leaves him without
protection?
Justice Harlan shows that Congress had the right to legislate
directly while that power was only implied, but that the moment
this power was conferred in express terms, then according to the
Supreme Court, it was lost.
There is another splendid definition given by Justice Harlan--a
line drawn as broad as the Mississippi. It is the distinction
between the rights conferred by a State and rights conferred by
the Nation. Admitting that many rights conferred by a State cannot
be enforced directly by Congress, Justice Harlan shows that rights
granted by the Nation to an individual may be protected by direct
legislation. This is a distinction that should not be forgotten,
and it is a definition clear and perfect.
Justice Harlan has shown that the Supreme Court failed to take into
consideration the intention of the framers of the amendment; failed
to see that the powers of Congress were given by express terms and
did not rest upon implication; failed to see that the Thirteenth
Amendment was broad enough to cover the Civil Rights Act; failed
to see that under the three amendments rights and privileges were
conferred by the Nation on citizens of the several States, and that
these rights are under the perpetual protection of the General
Government, and that for their enforcement Congress has the right
to legislate directly; failed to see that all implications are now
in favor of liberty instead of slavery; failed to comprehend that
we have a new nation with a new foundation, with different objects,
ends, and aims, for the attainment of which we use different means
and have been
|