If you're going to talk about the 14th Amendment, you need to be honest about what it actually says and how it's been used. Yes, it was passed during Reconstruction to protect formerly enslaved Black Americans. But it's not just about citizenship. You can't ignore that the Equal Protection Clause, which is part of the exact same section, is what gave us the legal foundation to fight segregation, win civil rights, and challenge discrimination in courts.
Some of you are defending Trump for saying birthright citizenship shouldn't apply to the children of immigrants because the 14th Amendment was originally meant for us. But that same Trump administration has repeatedly used the Equal Protection Clause to attack programs that directly benefit Black Americans. His legal teams (led by Stephen Miller's America first legal and Edward Blum) have sued to block policies aimed at helping Black farmers, Black-owned businesses, Black-focused education initiatives, the Voting Rights Act, Affirmative Action, and so on, by claiming they discriminate against white people.
How do you reconcile the contradiction? If someone is using one part of the 14th Amendment to exclude others, while using another part of it to dismantle resources and support systems created to help Black Americans, is that someone who truly respects the amendment's original purpose? Or are they using it to push an agenda that harms the very people it was designed to protect?
You can't say you're defending the legacy of the 14th Amendment for descendants of slavery while cheering on a politician who is actively undermining that same amendment when it's used to advance our rights and opportunities.
