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

To: DiogenesLamp
He ruled that Dred Scott had to remain a slave, and I see this ruling as consistent with the requirements of article IV. It is unfair to Dred Scott, but fairness and law do not always coincide.

He also ruled that blacks, free or slave, were not and could never be citizens. Do you think he was right there as well?

769 posted on 08/30/2015 5:14:25 AM PDT by DoodleDawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 764 | View Replies ]


To: DoodleDawg
He also ruled that blacks, free or slave, were not and could never be citizens. Do you think he was right there as well?

No. As I've said several times on these threads, That part he got wrong. Free Blacks had rights back then, and were regarded as citizens.

But as for his ruling on the legal disposition of Dred Scott, it looks to be consistent with the laws of that Era.

786 posted on 08/31/2015 3:33:46 PM PDT by DiogenesLamp ("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 769 | 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