>
> The justices held that Scott was not a citizen, and could
> not sue in federal court. That left the Missouri Supreme
> Court decision standing.
>
which I understood to be a large part of the author's point. throw a case out on a jurisdictional issue and you never have to rule on the facts. poor d.scott for not understanding the law and making a case while living in illinois or wisconsin. feds couldn't touch it once he got back to missouri. poor t.schiavo, congress wrote a law giving feds jurisdiction based on the constitution and the 14th amendment but birch says sorry you can't do that. end result being that the state's decision is left standing w/o looking at the facts of the case.
To rule on the facts without the party having standing would be judicial activism. Scott might have been a citizen under Scottish/French/Cuban (get the point?) laws, but not under US law.
congress wrote a law giving feds jurisdiction based on the constitution and the 14th amendment
And W/Jeb were WRONG for NOT enforcing it.