[DiogenesLamp]

Obviously you don't keep up. My position is that Article IV, section 2 already required this, and that Dred Scott merely affirmed what the Constitution already required.

[DoodleDawg]

My position is that Article IV, section 2 already required this, and that Dred Scott merely affirmed what the Constitution already required.

Like I said, odd-ball theories. Though I must admit that you are one of the few people I've met to speak approvingly of the Scott v. Sandford decision.