Agree completely.
And Prigg revealed that state regulations which required little things like evidence, due process had the effect of both protecting people who did not owe service, and protecting slave catchers from liability from (surely inadvertant) kidnapping of innocent persons.
Prigg had kidnapped at least one person who had never been a slave, and was found innocent of kidnapping. Such was the deference given to the slave power in 1826.
In 1859, less deference was given to the slave power, and state officials were not required in their official capacity to aid. Individual citizens, when called up as a posse by the federal marshal were required.
Differences between the state power, and those who gave that pretended power less deference were obliged to be resolved peacefully by litigation. If a state was involved, it would be litigated at the Supreme Court as original jurisdiction.
Isn’t it amusing how ‘consent of the governed’ went out the window whenever the slave power demanded its obscene right to the objects of its lust.
The 1850 Fugitive Slave Act was ruled constitutional by SCOTUS (Prigg was 1843, I think). Once the government commissioner found that the person in question was a slave, state laws no longer applied.