The Tom Woods Show, episode 444.

Prepare to set fire to the index card of allowable opinion.

Your daily dose of liberty education starts here, the Tom Woods Show.

Hey, everybody, Tom Woods here reminding you that you can get one of my books as an audio book for free at tom woods audio.com. You could get my

New York Times bestsellers meltdown on the financial crisis featuring a forward by Ron Paul

and the politically incorrect guide to American history or nullification or rollback or my latest

book with me reading it, Real Descent. Check it out at tom woods

audio.com. Hey everybody, Tom Woods here. The 14th Amendment is our subject for today.

This is a subject of controversy all over the place. It's controversial within libertarianism.

It's controversial within conservatism. It's controversial across the board. So we want to talk about it. Now, of course, in, well, let me just put it this way. In typical America today, it's not controversial at all. But on the other hand, mainstream America thinks that a matchup between Jeb Bush and Hillary Clinton would

be really exciting. So I'm not really concerned about what they think is interesting. I happen to

think the 14th Amendment is interesting, important, and is debatable. So we're going to talk about it

today with Kevin Goodsman, our old friend. Kevin Goodsman, as you may know, is co-author with me of Who Killed the Constitution,

a book from 2008, but in his own right, he is the author of the politically incorrect guide to

the Constitution, a New York Times bestseller, Virginia's American Revolution, and James

Madison and the Making of America. Kevin is a professor

of history at Western Connecticut State University, and he holds a Ph.D. in American history

from the University of Virginia. Kevin, welcome back to the show. Happy to be here, Tom.

The 14th Amendment is in the news. It's always in the news. Federal government is always doing something with it.

You would think it would have plenty already in the Constitution the way it wants to interpret it, that it wouldn't even need the 14th Amendment, but indeed it uses it.

And it came up recently in the decision related to same-sex marriage, but it really is all over the place.

So I thought it was important to clarify what it means.

...