Yep, which was even more strict than the NA of 1790 and was still restricted to free WHITE persons  The United States Naturalization Act of January 29, 1795 (1 ) repealed and replaced the . The 1795 Act differed from the 1790 Act by increasing the period of required residence increased from two to five years in the , and introducing the Declaration of Intention requirement, or first papers, which created a two-step  process. The Act specified that naturalized citizenship was reserved only for free white person[s]. Yep. Which was also restricted to free WHITE persons  The notice time refers to how long immigrants had to wait after declaring their intent to become a citizen. The residence period refers to how long they had to live in the  before they could become a citizen. The Naturalization Act is considered one of the  passed contemporaneously in 1798. Like the Naturalization Act of 1790, 1795, this act also restricted citizenship to free white persons. The 14th Amendment was never properly ratified:eek: And even if it were, the intentions of the fore fathers of the US including Washington, Jefferson and Franklin mean much more to me and my Patriotic comrades than the 14th Amendment which was not properly ratified in the first place.  Controversy over ratification A number of individuals argue that the ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment violated  of the Constitution. For instance,  argues that:The Fourteenth Amendment was proposed by a rump Congress that did not include representatives and senators from most of the former Confederate states, and, had those congressmen been present, the Amendment would never have passed.  Former Confederate states were counted for Article V purposes of ratification, but were not counted for Article I purposes of representation in the Congress.  The ratifications of the former Confederate states were not truly free, but were coerced. For instance, many former Confederate states had their readmittance to the Union conditioned on ratifying the Fourteenth Amendment.  In 1968, the Utah Supreme Court diverged from the  issue in a case to express its resentment against recent decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court under the Fourteenth Amendment, and to attack the Amendment itself:In order to have 27 states ratify the Fourteenth Amendment, it was necessary to count those states which had first rejected and then under the duress of military occupation had ratified, and then also to count those states which initially ratified but subsequently rejected the proposal. To leave such dishonest counting to a fractional part of Congress is dangerous in the extreme. What is to prevent any political party having control of both houses of the Congress from refusing to seat the opposition and then without more passing a joint resolution to the effect that the Constitution is amended and that it is the duty of the Administrator of the General Services Administration to proclaim the adoption? Would the Supreme Court of the United States still say the problem was political and refuse to determine whether constitutional standards had been met? How can it be conceived in the minds of anyone that a combination of powerful states can by force of arms deny another state a right to have representation in the Congress until it has ratified an amendment which its people oppose? The Fourteenth Amendment was adopted by means almost as bad as that suggested above. The , a resolution passed by the Georgia legislature, disputed the validity of the ratification of the Amendment. But they were all Black slaves and servants living on plantations and were not American citizens, and not intended to be as you are aware of by now I'm sure. They also intended the USA to be for WHITES ONLY. Right?? Also, the 14th Amendment was not properly ratified. The Southern states were forced to accept it to be re admitted to the Union, so they were obligated because they couldn't afford to start another Civil War they had already gotten beaten bad enough the first time. The 14th Amendment is null and void to a Patriot like myself.  Only Whites are truly American. If Washington, Jefferson, Jackson, Adams, Franklin etc..were here today they would never recognize a non White as an American, they would be disgraced. So how can you ever call yourself an American knowing that the men who created this country viewed you as a slave and a servant and in no way the social equal of a White man?? The answer is, you can't be American. Sorry. Your little piece of paper saying you're an American doesn't make you an American anymore than a Black Nigerian with a piece of paper saying he's French makes him a Frenchman:rolleyes:  We are well aware of this. It is most unfortunate and this is why we are dedicated to the second American revolution. The White Revolution.  This is no longer America. It's went too far astray from the fore father's intentions. But we are bringing America back, and you may as well begin to pack. :D Lol..equal rights...then what do you call Affirmative Action?? I call it preferential treatment based on race. Anti White racism. Equal my ass, the only way you Blacks can be equal is through race based policies such as Affirmative Action, you can only be equal if they lower the bar and practive AA. Yes, the past is gone, and the future is coming, and it's White.