Skip to main content

Was Chief Justice Roger Taney correct in arguing that the Court had to decide both the right of blacks to sue and the constitutionality of the...

I would argue that Chief Justice Taney was not correct to say that the Supreme Court of the United States had to decide both of these issues.  The Court could have decided the Dred Scott case even if it only ruled on one of these two questions.  Ruling on both questions was unnecessary, which is one reason why this case is often seen as a case in which the Court overreached itself.


In this case, the Court had to decide whether Dred Scott was a free man.  In order to say that he was free, it would have had to rule in his favor on two issues.  First, it would have had to say that he had the right to sue.  Second, it would have to find that, if he had the right to sue, he would still lose his law suit because there was no legal reason he should be free.  If the Court ruled against Scott on either of these issues, it would not have had to rule on the other issue.


The Court found first that Scott had no standing to sue.  It said that only citizens of the United States could bring law suits in federal court.  It said that Scott could not be a citizen of the United States because he was black.  The Court argued that the Framers had not intended to include blacks among the citizens of the United States at the time that they wrote the Constitution.


Once the Court had made this decision, it no longer needed to decide this case on the merits.  It could have simply dismissed the case because Scott had no standing.  Instead, Taney decided to rule on the issue of the Missouri Compromise.  He said that Scott would not be free even if he had standing to sue because the Missouri Compromise, which made the Wisconsin Territory free, was unconstitutional.  This was unnecessary.


Scholars say that it is best for the Supreme Court to make its decisions as narrow as possible.  The Court should not declare major laws passed by Congress to be unconstitutional unless it is absolutely necessary to do so.  In this case, Taney could have simply stated that Scott had no standing and dismissed the case.  Instead, he chose to interject the Court into the political issue of slavery.  This was a grave mistake.  Taney would not have had to decide on both of these issues.  He could have and perhaps should have ruled only on the first issue you mention.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Is there a word/phrase for "unperformant"?

As a software engineer, I need to sometimes describe a piece of code as something that lacks performance or was not written with performance in mind. Example: This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. Based on my Google searches, this isn't a real word. What is the correct way to describe this? EDIT My usage of "performance" here is in regard to speed and efficiency. For example, the better the performance of code the faster the application runs. My question and example target the negative definition, which is in reference to preventing inefficient coding practices. Answer This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. In my opinion, reads more easily as: This coding style leads to unmaintainable and poorly performing code. The key to well-written documentation and reports lies in ease of understanding. Adding poorly understood words such as performant decreases that ease. In addressing the use of such a poorly ...
Post a Comment
Read more

A man has a garden measuring 84 meters by 56 meters. He divides it into the minimum number of square plots. What is the length of the square plots?

We wish to divide this man's garden into the minimum number of square plots possible. A square has all four sides with the same length.Our garden is a rectangle, so the answer is clearly not 1 square plot. If we choose the wrong length for our squares, we may end up with missing holes or we may not be able to fit our squares inside the garden. So we have 84 meters in one direction and 56 meters in the other direction. When we start dividing the garden in square plots, we are "filling" those lengths in their respective directions. At each direction, there must be an integer number of squares (otherwise, we get holes or we leave the garden), so that all the square plots fill up the garden nicely. Thus, our job here is to find the greatest common divisor of 84 and 56. For this, we prime factor both of them: `56 = 2*2*2*7` `84 = 2*2*3*7` We can see that the prime factors and multiplicities in common are `2*2*7 = 28` . This is the desired length of the square plots. If you wi...
Post a Comment
Read more

What warning does Chuchundra issue to Rikki?

Chuchundra, the sniveling, fearful muskrat who creeps around walls because he is too terrified to go into the center of a room, meets Rikki in the middle of the night. He insults Rikki by begging him not to kill him. He then insults him by suggesting that Nag might mistake Chuchundra for Rikki. He says, "Those who kill snakes get killed by snakes."  He issues this warning to Rikki not to help keep Rikki safe but as a way of explaining why Rikki's presence gives him, Chuchundra, more reason to fear.  Chuchundra starts to tell Rikki what Chua the rat told him--but breaks it off when he realizes he might be overheard by Nag. He says, "Nag is everywhere, Rikki-Tikki." Rikki threatens to bite Chuchundra to get him to talk. Even then, Chuchundra won't overtly reveal any information. But he does say, "Can't you hear, Rikki-Tikki?" This is enough of a clue for the clever mongoose. He listens carefully and can just make out the "faintest scratch-s...
Post a Comment
Read more