No, it's not. The lack of authority of the 14th is a rather serious subject. The notion that the Constitution could be amended by the fabricated vote of military governors, and then that amendment used for the next century to accomplish a million and one ludicrous, undemocratic goals is a rather ridiculous one.
This insertion shows the background of the foundation of the modern judicial activist state. Everything from Roe V. Wade to affirmative action to citizenship for illegal alien anchor babies has been legitimated by contorted interpretations of the 14th. "Equal protection" was turned into a stick to undo laws wholesale.
Considering its effect, wouldn't it be prudent to ask if the 14th was actually "the will of the people"?
Lander Perez and others were voices in the wilderness dominated by the Warren court in 1967. Nobody listened, except for a few real conservatives. Their names were Goldwater, Reagan, Meese, Kirk, etc...and they were right.
The United States needs a new Constitutional convention to decide just what rights should really be incorporated. The abuse of the current amendments by judicial terrorists has led the country to where it is now, to something that does not resemble original intent in any way.
If the 14th, 16th and 17th Amendments were re-presented today for ratification, it would take five minutes for 38 states to ratify.
A new constitutional convention in this day and age scares me. There is even a big push being started to amend the Const. to allow a foreign born person to become president of the US. What other wonderful ideas would be championed and lobbied for at a convention if held in today's times?