I am now convinced that you are intentionally being obtuse. Many times you have been told that Art IV sec 2 refers specifically to fugitive slaves (that would be "runaway" slaves, escaped slaves, slaves who have left their master and run to a free state, looking for freedom). It is not a blanket statement about the legality/illegality of slavery. In fact it acknowledges that there are states where slavery is legal and that there are states where it is not legal. If that same slave had been brought into Pennsylvania by his master and kept in that state for over six months he would automatically become free by the state laws of Pennsylvania. Even George Washington understood this. Even the slaves understood this. Even Ichabod Crane understood this. You are apparently the only American who does not understand this.
Regardless, Taney (like Herod) settled the entire issue once and for all by deciding that blacks were not citizens, had never been citizens and never could be citizens. They were, as he said, a lower order of being than the white man. How did that work out for him? Within a scant two years the country entered into the largest bloodbath the world has ever seen.
ps Please don't drag out your pointy 3D graph/chart. You're gonna poke your eye out with that thing.
Yes, many people keep calling it that. Article IV Section 2 has no such verbiage in it, and last I checked, what people say is not dispositive of what is the law. It is the text of the law that determines what it's meaning will be, and the text says the slave will be returned per the laws of other states that require it.
Don't talk to me about being obtuse. Intentions and assertions do not matter. What matter are the text of the law.
If that same slave had been brought into Pennsylvania by his master and kept in that state for over six months he would automatically become free by the state laws of Pennsylvania.
The most liberal reading of Article IV Section 2 cannot yield such an interpretation. It only says they will be returned, it says nothing about "six months". It *DOES* say no state law can change the fact that the slave will be returned, so your Law of Pennsylvania is dead on arrival so far as Article IV Section 2 is concerned.
You are welcome to show me where in Article IV it allows another state to pass a law freeing a slave held by the laws of the state where the "labor is due."