Not for the people it actually managed to protect. There are groups and people that were at risk, were being abused and even slaughtered that it defended. Through well meaning judges and local enforcement, of course. But the stories that went the other way are far greater at present, and that’s a real problem.
I was clear when I said when it happens to protect the little guy, which is when certain institutions and judges use it to help them. I didn’t make the mistake of thinking or saying it was a perfect document meant to help everyone from its inception. But they did include the ability to adapt it through amendments.
Not for the people it actually managed to protect. There are groups and people that were at risk, were being abused and even slaughtered that it defended. Through well meaning judges and local enforcement, of course. But the stories that went the other way are far greater at present, and that’s a real problem.
…wealthy white landowners?
deleted by creator
you mean slave-owners?
So who would you say the 3/5ths compromise was protecting?
I was clear when I said when it happens to protect the little guy, which is when certain institutions and judges use it to help them. I didn’t make the mistake of thinking or saying it was a perfect document meant to help everyone from its inception. But they did include the ability to adapt it through amendments.