[tpaine]

Slavery was a matter of state, not federal, law. Read a book.
440 -roscoe-

Read the constitution, 'the law of the land' refutes your silly claim.
In any case, slavery was used as an example of how congress & courts can be wrong on basic principles. Thus, your 'point' is just another dodge & an attempt to divert the issue.
448 tpaine

I'll call that cheap bluff. Quote it.
449 -roscoe-

Art I Sec 9:

No support for your false assertion there, which is why you couldn't bring yourself to quote it. In fact, Art I Sec 9, disproves your entire thread.
The Constitution contains one, and ONLY one, limit on prohibitory laws.

Article. I., Section. 9., Clause 1: The Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a Tax or duty may be imposed on such Importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each Person.

The law of the land, supported by congress & the USSC, clearly has laws on the matter of slavery.

Poor roscoe. Wrong again

[Roscoe]

clearly has laws on the matter of slavery.

Quote one. Slavery was a matter of state regulation.

Article. IV., Section. 2.,Clause 3: No Person held to Service or Labour in one State, under the Laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in Consequence of any Law or Regulation therein, be discharged from such Service or Labour, but shall be delivered up on Claim of the Party to whom such Service or Labour may be due.

Shot yourself in the foot again.