Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: rockrr; Jim 0216
one particular ethnicity of human

The Dred Scott case was not about any "ethnicity" en masse, but about a particular individual who was legally a slave at point A, but (perhaps) not at point B. Every state had free people of African descent.

113 posted on 02/19/2017 7:01:42 PM PST by Tax-chick ("I prefer to think of myself as ... civilized." ~Jonathan Q. Higgins)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies ]


To: Tax-chick

From Wackypedia (grabbed for expediency):

On March 6, 1857, Chief Justice Roger B. Taney delivered the majority opinion. Taney ruled that:

Any person descended from Africans, whether slave or free, is not a citizen of the United States, according to the Constitution.
The Ordinance of 1787 could not confer either freedom or citizenship within the Northwest Territory to non-white individuals.
The provisions of the Act of 1820, known as the Missouri Compromise, were voided as a legislative act, since the act exceeded the powers of Congress, insofar as it attempted to exclude slavery and impart freedom and citizenship to non-white persons in the northern part of the Louisiana Purchase.[13]

The Court had ruled that African Americans had no claim to freedom or citizenship. Since they were not citizens, they did not possess the legal standing to bring suit in a federal court. As slaves were private property, Congress did not have the power to regulate slavery in the territories and could not revoke a slave owner’s rights based on where he lived.

Worst SCOTUS decision ever.


114 posted on 02/19/2017 7:45:11 PM PST by rockrr (Everything is different now...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson