Hacker News Reader

That change really requires a constitutional amendment, since the relevant article talks about counting persons, not citizens.

View on HN

So what do you make of the phrase in Amendment 14 section two; "excluding Indians not taxed."? Do you suppose maybe they were trying to limit the representation to citizens?

Maybe they were but the compromise they accepted was Indians not taxed, so unless there’s some pretty surprising evidence…

Well, at the time, Indians (Native Americans) were the largest populaton of non-citizens residing in the country. That is no longer the case today. (There are 10 times more non-citizens than non-citizen Native Americans today.)

Ok. So? Still need an amendment.

Citizens? Surely you mean taxpayers?

And through some impressive legal magic perversity, illegal immigrants in the US pay plenty of taxes. "No taxation without representation", wasn't that a phrase?

The illegal immigrants do pay plenty of taxes, but how many of them pay Federal Income Tax? It's not something that you can do without a SSN.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com