Equal protection "of" the law means that the law must protect everyone equally or it is unconstitutional. Currently, this is not being enforced because lawyers and politicians
… have twisted the meaning to be "equal protection under the law." Equal protection "under the law" essentially means that once a law is passed all those subjugated to it must be treated "equally under" it. It is obvious that although this appears on the surface to create equality, it in fact divides people from their inherent right to have all laws treat them the same. I will provide you two excellent examples of this. The state passed a law telling all colleges that the percentages of students accepted at their college must be representative of those racial ratios within their community. This means that if blacks comprise 23% of the population within the community then 23% of the students accepted need to be black to ensure "racial equality." This law may seem "fair" on the surface but in fact, it is not. Because the state only monitors those classes, it sees fit to monitor and enforce. Additionally, it forces colleges to accept students who would not usually be accepted due to poor performance in the lower grades. Finally, those students who are high achievers are sometimes denied the right to attend a college based solely on the basis that their particular race class had more than the "allowed" percentage. This we easily see a three way split in the "equal treatment" law. Another law similar to this is a law that disallows peace officer to be sued for liable personally when they injure someone while affecting an arrest. This law clearly allows for a special protection, which would not be considered equally bestowed on the whole of society. For the law to provide protection equally, it would have to read, "no one may be held personally liable for injury when they are reasonably acting to enforce the laws of the state." Thus, all citizens would be protected equally from liability when making arrest. So to answere the question...currently, none. There are significant reasons within the lawyer community that this change in the meaning of the law exists, and I will not go into them now except to say…ask yourself which interpretation causes the most conflict. (MORE) 