Posted on 09/15/2003 5:39:03 PM PDT by DoughtyOne
That age started in 1803.. The Chief Justice was John Marshall. Jefferson was president and the Surpreme court ruled it had powers that were not to be found anywhere in the words of the constitution. The case was Marbury Vs. Madison. (You know Madison... he wrote the constitution) The court ruled against Madison.. Justice Marshall figured what the hell could Madison know about the constitution.. he only wrote it... He never got to interpret it like Chief Justice Marshall.
You mean a supreme court ruling that some people are not human beings was really in the constitution and not made up by the Chief Justice. Dred Scott decision
On March 6th, 1857, Chief Justice Roger B. Taney delivered the majority opinion of the U.S. Supreme Court in the Dred Scott case. Seven of the nine justices agreed that Dred Scott should remain a slave, but Taney did not stop there. He also ruled that as a slave, Dred Scott was not a citizen of the United States, and therefore had no right to bring suit in the federal courts on any matter. In addition, he declared that Scott had never been free, due to the fact that slaves were personal property; thus the Missouri Compromise of 1820 was unconstitutional, and the Federal Government had no right to prohibit slavery in the new territories. The court appeared to be sanctioning slavery under the terms of the Constitution itself, and saying that slavery could not be outlawed or restricted within the United States.
Would you be so kind as to tell me in what section of the constitution it says some humans are just personal property and others aren't? And why the section that says all persons born in the USA are citizens was not in Roger Taney's copy of the Constitution?
You should try reading the actual court decisions rather than listening to politicans who can depend on your ignorance to fool you. You don't have to be dumb to believe the junk you believe, but you have to be very ignorant.
I have about 100 more examples... if you want to keep making a fool out of yourself.
You mean a supreme court ruling that some people are not human beings was really in the constitution and not made up by the Chief Justice. Dred Scott decision
On March 6th, 1857, Chief Justice Roger B. Taney delivered the majority opinion of the U.S. Supreme Court in the Dred Scott case. Seven of the nine justices agreed that Dred Scott should remain a slave, but Taney did not stop there. He also ruled that as a slave, Dred Scott was not a citizen of the United States, and therefore had no right to bring suit in the federal courts on any matter. In addition, he declared that Scott had never been free, due to the fact that slaves were personal property; thus the Missouri Compromise of 1820 was unconstitutional, and the Federal Government had no right to prohibit slavery in the new territories. The court appeared to be sanctioning slavery under the terms of the Constitution itself, and saying that slavery could not be outlawed or restricted within the United States.
Would you be so kind as to tell me in what section of the constitution it says some humans are just personal property and others aren't? And why the section that says all persons born in the USA are citizens was not in Roger Taney's copy of the Constitution?
You should try reading the actual court decisions rather than listening to politicans who can depend on your ignorance to fool you. You don't have to be dumb to believe the junk you believe, but you have to be very ignorant.
I have about 100 more examples... if you want to keep making a fool out of yourself.
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.