Curious why DiogenesLamp distorts this, since the issue was not whether "traveling through a 'Free State' " emancipated slaves, but rather permanently settling in a free state, as Dred Scott was.
From Day One the distinction was made & honored between temporary and permanent residence, where slaves could be held in the former, but not the latter.
Dred Scott v. Sanford first erased this distinction and now DiogenesLamp wishes to argue it was never, in fact, there.
But it was, recognized & respected by all, including President Washington, regardless of later novel interpretations.
Reasonable, rational, responsible people regard the Dred Scott ruling to be among the (if not the very) worst decision ever rendered by SCOTUS.
The implications and consequences of this ruling were so far reaching and so draconian that many regard it as the spark that ignited the eventual Civil War.
I have no respect for anyone who can’t (or won’t) see this.