For Immediate Release
Contact: Tonja Edwards @ 323-392-9878
Constitutional “Smoking Gun” Evidence Calls for Suspension- Moratorium of Trump v. Barbara Until National Reconstruction Citizenship Review Is Conducted
Los Angeles, California — Civil rights activist and Reconstruction citizenship advocate Ted Hayes, aka Mr. Citizen Patriot @ https://MrPatriot.us, in the name of We the People, and The Most High GOD, The Central Person of the 250 years old Declaration of Independence, is summoning the Supreme Court of the United States to suspend, dismiss, moratorium Trump v. Barbara, upon President Donald Trump to voluntarily withdraw the case, and upon the American Civil Liberties Union and related civil-rights organizations to support a national moratorium and public-awareness campaign concerning the original remedial purpose of the Civil Rights Act of 1866 and the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
At the core of this matter is the clause of the first three words of the 14th Amendment, “All persons born…”, (who are they?) of which “The Smoking Gun” Evidence proves who these persons are, the babies of illegal aliens, or those of America’s chattel slaves.
Ted Hayes contends and renders as an impossible-to-refute argument that President Andrew Johnson’s #17 demonstrates who they are by this letter to the then US Senate, vetoing the 1866 Civil Rights Act of Remedial for harms done by the USA, federal citizenship.
According to the SCOTUS requirements for pro se Amicus Curiae Briefs, to be submitted by March 18th, 2026, for the Trump v. Barbara case, Hayes was able to enter his Brief on time and is therefore within the walls of the Court, and no doubt, given its uniqueness, is being considered by the Clerk thereof.
At the center of the appeal is Hayes’ soon-to-be-released constitutional essay book, The Primary Beneficiaries Doctrine: The Smoking Gun of Reconstruction Citizenship, which examines President Andrew Johnson’s 1866 veto message opposing the Civil Rights Act.
The essay argues that Johnson’s own repeated references to “freedmen,” “persons heretofore held in slavery,” “the colored race,” and “millions born upon our soil” unintentionally preserve the historical Reconstruction context surrounding federal citizenship protections after slavery. Not immigrants of any sort, legally and especially not illegal.
Read the essay here: The Smoking Gun of Reconstruction Citizenship or https://tedhayes.us/smokingun/
Hayes argues that before the nation proceeds further into modern birthright-citizenship litigation, America must first conduct a serious national educational review concerning the original remedial federal citizenship protections created for the emancipated chattel slave population and their children following the Civil War.
“This is not merely an immigration debate,” Hayes stated. “This is a constitutional identity matter tied directly to Reconstruction, slavery, federal citizenship, and America’s unfinished covenant following emancipation. Before the Court finalizes rulings affecting generations to come, the nation deserves a full and honest educational reckoning concerning the historical foundations of Reconstruction citizenship itself.”
Hayes argues that after approximately 405 years of slavery, Black Codes, Jim Crow segregation, racial violence, forced illiteracy, economic exclusion, and continuing social collapse reflected in disproportionate rates of homelessness, incarceration, youth violence, poverty, and murder within the American African community, the nation owes at minimum a serious and honest educational examination of the original remedial purpose behind the Civil Rights Act of 1866 and the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
Hayes contends that this proposed national awareness campaign would cost taxpayers little or nothing, yet could help restore constitutional understanding, dignity, historical clarity, and civic purpose to the descendants of America’s chattel slaves — the very people upon whose labor the modern nation was materially built, and upon whose historic struggle all later immigrants, legal and illegal alike, now stand.
“Who,” asks Hayes, “can reasonably oppose a humble request that the living human foundation of this so-called nation of immigrants under GOD finally understand and embrace the specialized constitutional protections and responsibilities emerging from Reconstruction itself?” Referring to the broader national discourse surrounding racial justice, Hayes adds:
“People across the world say ‘Black Lives Matter.’ Well, this is the constitutional matter of Black lives. To deny even an educational review of these remedial federal laws would reflect not reconciliation, but the continuation of a long historical indifference toward the people transformed from chattel slaves into federal citizens of the United States.”