[Mr Rogers]

“I’ve given direct quotes. You can’t get around this, so it’s time to admit you’re wrong..”

No, you haven’t. Not if read by someone who understands basic English. But of course, in your world, the courts ignore your interpretation because of a Great Conspiracy, when in reality they reject it because you are nuts.

Minor:

“In 1867, Minor co-founded and became the first president of the Woman’s Suffrage Association of Missouri (later an affiliate of the American Woman Suffrage Association). Minor personally sided with the National Woman’s Suffrage Association, prompting her resignation as President of the Missouri Association. At an 1869 convention in St. Louis, Minor stated that “the Constitution of the United States gives me every right and privilege to which every other citizen is entitled.” Later that year, Francis and Virginia Minor drafted and circulated pamphlets arguing for women’s suffrage based on the newly-passed Fourteenth Amendment.

On October 15, 1872, Virginia Minor attempted to register to vote in St. Louis. When election registrar Reese Happersett turned her down, Virginia (represented by Francis) filed suit in the Missouri state courts. The trial court, Missouri Supreme Court, and United States Supreme Court all ruled in favor of the state of Missouri. The Supreme Court unanimously held “that the Constitution of the United States does not confer the right of suffrage upon any one”, and that the decision of who should be entitled to vote was left to the legislative branch.”

“Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162 (1875), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that the Constitution did not grant women the right to vote. The Supreme Court upheld state court decisions in Missouri, which had refused to register a woman as a lawful voter because that state’s laws allowed only men to vote.

The Minor v. Happersett ruling was based on an interpretation of the Privileges or Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Supreme Court readily accepted that Minor was a citizen of the United States, but it held that the constitutionally protected privileges of citizenship did not include the right to vote.”

Of course, Wiki is also part of the Great Conspiracy...

:>(

[edge919]

Don't be ridiculous. Since when does the Supreme Court rely on a "wiki" to summarize the holding of a case for them?? Again, you can't get around the actual facts. The Supreme Court gave the holding of Minor in Wong Kim Ark and INCLUDED the inconvenient fact that the Minor court based Virginia Minor's citizenship on being born to citizen parents, contrary to her argument of being a citizen via the 14th amendment.

Minor v. Happersett (1874), 21 Wall. 162, 166-168. The decision in that case was that a woman born of citizen parents within the United States was a citizen of the United States, although not entitled to vote, the right to the elective franchise not being essential to citizenship.

Are you going to call this a "screw up" too???