US Civil War Started Because of Territorial Jurisdiction

Spread the love

Scott Dred (1795–1858)

Most people have heard about the famous Dred Scott decision by the Supreme Court that led to the US Civil War. It was a decision that showed how the court, dominated by Southern pro-slavery judges, bent the law to keep what their friends wanted.

Dred Scott was an African-American slave who had asked a United States Circuit Court to award him his freedom because he and his master had resided in a state (Illinois) and a territory (Wisconsin Territory) where slavery had been banned. Chief Justice Roger Taney, writing for the court, held that Scott, as a person of African ancestry, was not a citizen of the United States and therefore had no right to sue in federal court. This holding was so off the wall and contrary to the whole concept of Territorial Jurisdiction.

Once the Supreme Court abandoned all rule of law, all that was left was Civil War. The rationale of the Supreme Court regarding the jurisdictional ruling implied that people of African descent (both slave and free) were not protected by the Constitution and were not U.S. citizens. Since passage of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, both rulings are superseded and no longer valid precedent. Nonetheless, the case retains historical significance as it is widely regarded as the worst decision ever made by the Supreme Court. The opinion of the court, written by Chief Justice Roger B. Taney, was 7–2, and every Justice besides Taney wrote a separate concurrence or dissent.

This is the danger we face regarding this greed for taxes. A free-for-all and total collapse of the economy.