Posted on 08/14/2017 7:24:51 PM PDT by 11th_VA
In the wake of a violent white supremacist rally in neighboring Virginia, House Speaker Michael E. Busch said Monday it’s time to take down Maryland’s most prominent Confederate-era monument.
Busch said the statue of former U.S. Supreme Court Justice Roger B. Taney — author of the infamous 1857 Dred Scott decision that upheld slavery and denied citizenship to black people — should no longer preside over the front lawn of the Maryland State House.
“It certainly doesn’t belong there,” said Busch, an Anne Arundel County Democrat.
“It's the appropriate time to remove it,” he said. Leaving it in place after white supremacists openly rallied “would send a message that we condone what took place, that slavery is alright.”...
(Excerpt) Read more at baltimoresun.com ...
[In the wake of a violent white supremacist rally in neighboring Virginia]
The narrative is set.
Btw if they remove his statue I’m going to miss going up there and seeing the face of the man who inaugurated Lincoln
I usually leave him a penny :-)
Think of what history the children of Maryland will miss, and the opportunity for intellectual,debate over the legal grounds of the Dred Scott case
Which has some parallels to,discussing the “ rights” and protections of illegal ( undocumented) persons now in Ameruca
***U.S. Supreme Court Justice Roger B. Taney — author of the infamous 1857 Dred Scott decision that upheld slavery and denied citizenship to black people ***
In that decision he stated the RIGHTS blacks would have if they were considered citizens, the same rights Whites had, one of which was “THE RIGHT TO KEEP AND CARRY ARMS WHEREVER THEY WENT.”
Thanks. History isn’t as simple as most would like to believe.
***He was a Klansman and his hate of Catholicism influenced his landmark secision.***
Taney? He died in 1864 well before the KKK was started.
Someone is confused
Taney was Catholic
In fact the first Catholic justice appointed to the USSC
KKK?
Nope
Abe Lincoln’s Chief Justice of the USSC didn’t play that game
Taney inherited slaves and freed them with lifetime pensions
He died just after the war
No, statues of the Founding Fathers are next.
Either way,..
Taneytown will have to be renamed.... hmmmm, what name would make a racist mad....
All those museums filled with the white man’s art...
So sick of all this bullshit. And Nikki Haley helped to feed it by removing the Confederate Flag..just sayin’...
Tit for tat: It’s time to get ride of the Frederick Douglass statue before the county courthouse at Easton, Maryland.
Perfect timing. Maybe he can start a race war.....
That is what I have been saying.
***U.S. Supreme Court Justice Roger B. Taney — author of the infamous 1857 Dred Scott decision that upheld slavery and denied citizenship to black people ***
In that decision he stated the RIGHTS blacks would have if they were considered citizens, the same rights Whites had, one of which was “THE RIGHT TO KEEP AND CARRY ARMS WHEREVER THEY WENT.”
Right. And now blacks can kill whites and walk away with a slap on the hand, if that.
Slavery, unfortunately, was clearly legal under the pre-Civil War Constitution. If it hadn’t been legal, the southern states never would have joined the Union. That state of affairs was not Taney’s fault; he did not write the Constitution.
what ‘statues’ should we remove because a leftist racist shot our Congresscritters? Malcom X? MLK? Oscars?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Everson_v._Board_of_Education
Everson v. Board of Education, 330 U.S. 1 (1947)[1][2] was a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court which applied the Establishment Clause in the country’s Bill of Rights to State law. Prior to this decision the First Amendment words, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion”[3] imposed limits only on the federal government, while many states continued to grant certain religious denominations legislative or effective privileges.[4] This was the first Supreme Court case incorporating the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment as binding upon the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The decision in Everson marked a turning point in the interpretation and application of disestablishment law in the modern era.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugo_Black
Hugo Black was also a one-time member of the Ku Klux Klan as revealed by journalist Ray Sprigle of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, who uncovered Black’s handwritten resignation from the Klan on July 9, 1925,[8] When confronted with the evidence that Hugo Black had been a member of the Klan, he responded in part: “Before becoming a Senator I dropped the Klan. I have had nothing to do with it since that time. I abandoned it. I completely discontinued any association with the organization.”[9]
A reformer in the Senate[10] and a devoted New Dealer,[11] Black endorsed Roosevelt in both the 1932 and 1936 presidential elections.
...Black wrote the majority opinion in Korematsu v. United States, which upheld Japanese internment during World War II.
Ku Klux Klan and anti-Catholicism[edit]
Shortly after Black’s appointment to the Supreme Court, Ray Sprigle of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette wrote a series of articles revealing Black’s involvement in the Klan, for which he won a Pulitzer Prize.[103] The first article in the series was published on Sept 13, 1937, barely a month after Black’s appointment and shortly after his confirmation. Titled “Justice Black Revealed as Ku Klux Klansman,”[104] the article described how Black’s resignation from the Klan “was the first move of his campaign for the Democratic nomination for United States Senator from Alabama.”
At a press conference on Sept 14 1937, Roosevelt was asked about whether he had knowledge of Black’s involvement with the Ku Klux Klan. He responded in part, “I know only what I have read in the newspapers…Mr. Justice Black is abroad. Until such time as he returns there is no further comment to be made.”[105] On Sept 21 1937, FDR was again asked during a press conference about whether or not he had communications with Hugo Black regarding his involvement in the Ku Klux Klan. Again, FDR denied speaking with Hugo Black, and when asked about whether the Department of Justice should be “charged automatically” with investigating Supreme Court appointments, FDR said in part, “No, certainly not...a man’s private life is supposed to be his private life...”
On Sept 21, 1937, Hugo Black was “besieged” by reporters. He said, “If I make any statement it will be in a way the people can hear me and understand what I have to say, and not have to depend on some parts of the press which might fail to report all I have to say.”[106]
On October 1, 1937, Hugo Black made a statement over the radio.[107] Black said in part, “I number among my friends many members of the colored race. Certainly, they are entitled to the full measure of protection accorded by our Constitution and our laws...”[108] Black also said, “I did join the Klan. I later resigned. I never rejoined.... Before becoming a Senator I dropped the Klan. I have had nothing to do with it since that time. I abandoned it. I completely discontinued any association with the organization. I have never resumed it and never expect to do so.”[109] The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reported that “fifty million listeners heard the unprecedented speech.”
Near the end of his life, Black would claim that joining the Klan was a mistake, and went on to say “I would have joined any group if it helped get me votes.”[32]
Biographers in the 1990s examined Black’s views of religious denominations. Ball found regarding the Klan that Black “sympathized with the group’s economic, nativist, and anti-Catholic beliefs.”[110] Newman said Black “disliked the Catholic Church as an institution” and gave numerous anti-Catholic speeches in his 1926 election campaign to Ku Klux Klan meetings across Alabama.[111] However, in 1937 The Harvard Crimson reported on Black’s appointment of a Jewish law clerk, noting that he “earlier had appointed Miss Annie Butt, a Catholic, as a secretary, and the Supreme Court had designated Leon Smallwood, a Negro and a Catholic as his messenger.”[112]
Reparations? For what? Slavery never existed.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.