Search results

Cover -- Title Page -- Copyright Page -- Table of Contents -- Text of Amendment XIV (1868) -- Series Foreword -- Acknowledgments -- A Preface to the Forgotten Fourteenth Amendment Series -- Introduction: Three Republican Soloists and the Republican Chorus -- 1. The Exclusion Debate -- 2. The Problem of Rebel Rule -- 3. Protecting and Empowering the Loyal -- 4. Guarantees -- 5. To Colorado and Beyond -- Conclusion: Rebels, Loyalists, and Racial Equality -- Appendices -- A.1: House Votes on the Fourteenth Amendment, the Exclusion Resolution, and Statehood for Colorado and Nebraska -- A.2: Senate Votes on the Fourteenth Amendment, the Exclusion Resolution, and Statehood for Colorado and Nebraska -- A.3: References to "Rebel" and "Loyal" in the House of Representatives -- A.4: References to "Rebel" and "Loyal" in the Senate -- A.5: References Paired with "Rebel" in the Thirty-Ninth Congress, First Session: All -- A.6: References Paired with "Rebel" in the Thirty-Ninth Congress, First Session: Opponents of the Fourteenth Amendment -- A.7: Conditions for Readmission of Former Confederate States: Members of Congress -- A.8: Conditions for Readmission of Former Confederate States: Petitions -- Calendar of the Thirty-Ninth Congress, First Session -- Notes -- Index -- Back Cover.

"In contemporary constitutional politics, Section One of the Fourteenth Amendment-which includes the citizenship, privileges and immunities, due process, and equal protection clauses-is the star of the show, with some attention given to Section Five. But this was not the focus of interest for the Republican members of the Thirty-Ninth Congress. Their interest was instead in Sections Two, Three, and Four. Today we tend to think the purpose of the Fourteenth Amendment was to protect persons of color. But the Republicans engaged in Reconstruction saw its purpose as preventing "rebel rule" by punishing treason and rewarding loyalty, particularly loyal whites who remained faithful to the Union during the Civil War. In this first of three planned volumes for UPK's Constitutional Thinking series, Mark Graber aims to restore to contemporary memory the Fourteenth Amendment drafted by those Republican and Unionist members of Congress who supported congressional reconstruction"--

Contemporary civil libertarians claim that their works preserve a worthy American tradition of defending free-speech rights dating back to the framing of the First Amendment. Transforming Free Speech challenges the worthiness, and indeed the very existence of one uninterrupted libertarian tradition. Mark A. Graber asserts that in the past, broader political visions inspired libertarian interpretations of the First Amendment. In reexamining the philosophical and jurisprudential foundations of the defense of expression rights from the Civil War to the present, he exposes the monolithic free-speech tradition as a myth. Instead of one conception of the system of free expression, two emerge: the conservative libertarian tradition that dominated discourse from the Civil War until World War I, and the civil libertarian tradition that dominates later twentieth-century argument. The essence of the current perception of the American free-speech tradition derives from the writings of Zechariah Chafee, Jr. (1885-1957), the progressive jurist most responsible for the modern interpretation of the First Amendment. His interpretation, however, deliberately obscured earlier libertarian arguments linking liberty of speech with liberty of property. Moreover, Chafee stunted the development of a more radical interpretation of expression rights that would give citizens the resources and independence necessary for the effective exercise of free speech. Instead, Chafee maintained that the right to political and social commentary could be protected independent of material inequalities that might restrict access to the marketplace of ideas. His influence enfeebled expression rights in a world where their exercise depends increasingly on economic power. Untangling the libertarian legacy, Graber points out the disjunction in the libertarian tradition to show that free-speech rights, having once been transformed, can be transformed again. Well-conceived and original in perspective, Transforming Free Speech will interest political theorists, students of government, and anyone interested in the origins of the free-speech tradition in the United States.