In other words you're too intellectually lazy to look at the argument as-presented. Besides that, case-law is not indicative of correctness/substantiation... otherwise I could simply (and legitimately) cite Dread Scott and any other overturned case (that they were overturned is irrelevant, except in illustrating they were recognized, legally, as wrong) to do so.
Your philosophy elevates "case-law" above Constitutional-law (though what is refereed to as "constitutional law" right now is actually "case-law as applied to the constitution" rather than actual reasoning as applied to the actual Constitution.)
Another asinine accusation. Arguments should be based on facts and evidence, not emotions. You are emoting.
SCOTUS never reversed or overturned that decision. Not even after the Civil War.
Just an interesting factoid you can use to impress your friends and relatives.