THE APPEAL FOR THE GREAT, 14th AMENDMENT MORATORIUM
Ted Hayes
Founder, Justiceville
Mr. Citizen Patriot
Venice, California
June ___, 2026
The Honorable Mike Johnson, Speaker of the House
The Honorable Hakeem Jeffries, House Minority Leader
The Honorable John Thune, Senate Majority Leader
The Honorable Charles Schumer, Senate Minority Leader
and Members of the United States Congress
United States Capitol
Washington, D.C.
Re: A Respectful Appeal for a National Moratorium and Congressional Examination of the Civil Rights Act of 1866 and the Fourteenth Amendment
Dear Speaker Johnson, Minority Leader Jeffries, Majority Leader Thune, Minority Leader Schumer, and Members of Congress:
[Special Acknowledgment to the Congressional Black Caucus:0
I respectfully acknowledge the members of the Congressional Black Caucus, to whom I am transmitting separate correspondence addressing matters of particular historical interest concerning Reconstruction, federal citizenship, and the Civil Rights Act of 1866.
For present purposes, I simply note that this appeal is respectfully extended to all Members of Congress, including the Congressional Black Caucus, as participants in a national conversation whose origins trace directly to the debates of 1866.
Consider this fact:
The debate presently before the nation did not begin in the Supreme Court.
It began in 1866 in the Legislative, i.e., Congress, not the Judicial, i.e., Supreme Court, or the Executive Branch, even though it was via President Lincoln and his 1861 Emancipation Proclamation Covenant, which he made with GOD, is the foundation for the unprecedented Triad Amendments of which the Reconstruction Amendments would later arise.
The Civil Rights Act of 1866 was written, debated, enacted, vetoed, defended, and ultimately preserved by Congress. The Fourteenth Amendment likewise emerged from congressional deliberation and congressional purpose.
President Andrew Johnson directed his objections to Congress. Congress answered those objections. Congress overrode the veto. Congress then proposed the constitutional protections that became the Fourteenth Amendment.
Accordingly, before the Supreme Court renders a decision touching questions of citizenship and constitutional identity, it is appropriate to remember that the original debate began within the halls of Congress itself.
As America enters its 250th year, Congress possesses a unique opportunity—and perhaps a unique responsibility—to help reopen that conversation for the benefit of the American people.
I respectfully submit that the nation is approaching a potentially historic decision without first conducting a sufficiently broad examination of the Civil Rights Act of 1866, its intended beneficiaries, its remedial purposes, and its relationship to the Fourteenth Amendment.
For generations, Americans have debated the constitutional lock while paying comparatively little attention to the legislative house upon which that lock was placed.
Whether one ultimately agrees or disagrees with that observation is secondary to the larger point: the American people deserve the fair and justified opportunity to examine the question before reaching permanent conclusions. This is particularly pertinent to federal citizens, as it concerns their existence in the USA.
Therefore, I respectfully urge Congress to support a temporary educational moratorium concerning the issues raised in Trump v. Barbara and the broader questions of federal citizenship, Reconstruction, and constitutional identity.
Such a moratorium would not prevent eventual adjudication.
Rather, it would allow the nation to better understand what is being adjudicated.
Congress possesses unique tools unavailable to any other branch of government.
Congress may conduct hearings. Congress may commission historical reviews.
Congress may convene scholars, jurists, historians, educators, military leaders, civil-rights organizations, and citizens.
Congress may help educate the nation concerning its own legislative history.
No institution is better positioned to revisit the debates of 1866 than the institution that conducted them.
No institution is better positioned to revisit the Johnson veto than the institution that overrode it.
No institution is better positioned to examine the purposes of the Civil Rights Act of 1866 than the institution that enacted it.
As America commemorates its 250th anniversary, such an undertaking would not merely illuminate a legal controversy. It would encourage a deeper national understanding of citizenship, equality, constitutional development, and the unfinished questions emerging from slavery, emancipation, and Reconstruction.
I have submitted similar appeals to the Supreme Court of the United States and to the President of the United States. Comparable correspondence is also being directed to organizations and institutions that have long participated in debates concerning civil rights, citizenship, and constitutional interpretation.
My purpose is not to advance one political party over another, nor one faction over another.
My purpose is to encourage understanding before judgment. Education before adjudication. Truth before consequence.
As legislators entrusted with preserving the constitutional order, Members of Congress possess a unique opportunity to assist the nation in revisiting one of the most consequential debates in American history before its next chapter is written.
For further historical documentation, legal analysis, constitutional discussion, and supporting materials, I respectfully refer you to the accompanying work:
The Great 14th Amendment Moratorium Papers
Education Before Adjudication. America can survive disagreement.
It cannot long thrive upon misunderstanding. Education Before Adjudication.
Understanding Before Division. Truth Before Consequence.
Respectfully submitted,
Ted Hayes
Founder, Justiceville
Mr. Citizen Patriot
Enclosure:
The Great 14th Amendment Moratorium Papers
Education Before Adjudication