AHC WI Supreme Court frees Dredd Scott

[Derek Jackson]

In otl that decision made it very hard even for Free states to outlaw slavery and meant that Afican Americans had essentially no rights

Suppose the Court had accepted that since under the laws of Illinois and Wisconsin slavery.

I guess it required different Justices on the Court and maybe other Presidents.

Might it have prevented the Republicans winning in 1860?

Or could it maybe have provoked sessession in 1857

 

[Mikestone8]

They wouldn't have ruled in his favour.

Conceivably, though, they might have ruled more narrowly, saying that to sue in Federal court he had to be a US Citizen, that to be a US Citizen he had to be a citizen of Missouri, and the Missouri Supreme Court, the final arbiter on the latter point, had already decided that he wasn't. This would have been far less controversial.

 

[usertron2020]

Assuming different presidents, with more justices with more northern sensibilities, plus a few "blown up" choices ala David Souter-types, it could happen. Chief Justice Taney REALLY went balls-to-the-wall in the most extreme interpretations and questions answered that he could. Pretty much legally to the point of "...shoot 'em at high noon on 5th Avenue" stuff. OTOH, we were electing northerners with southern sympathies. Even with Skippy the Alien Space Bat "changing the minds" of the SCOTUS, either or both he and the public would ignore the order, ala Jackson or countless massacres carried out by locals that were (sometimes) without the knowledge of higher (or very much higher) authorities.

 

[Arcavia]

They wouldn't have ruled in his favour.

Conceivably, though, they might have ruled more narrowly, saying that to sue in Federal court he had to be a US Citizen, that to be a US Citizen he had to be a citizen of Missouri, and the Missouri Supreme Court, the final arbiter on the latter point, had already decided that he wasn't. This would have been far less controversial.

How did this aspect of citizenship work before the 14th amendment's citizenship clause, though? IIRC the "...and of the state in which they reside" concept or similar didn't really exist before 1865. Was it simply a common law issue?

 

[FillyofDelphi]

How did this aspect of citizenship work before the 14th amendment's citizenship clause, though? IIRC the "...and of the state in which they reside" concept or similar didn't really exist before 1865. Was it simply a common law issue?

Naturalization Act of 1795, which specifies citizenship for Free White Persons who's parents were citizens of The United States and have resided within it are naturally born citizens.

 

[Arcavia]

Does that act have the same or similar clause? IIRC it just defined a general US citizenship

 

[James Ricker]

If they did rule in favor of Dred Scott, there would be a mass Exodus on slaves to northern states. You would have newly freed blacks competing with poor whites for jobs that would raise some resentment.
I suspect most blacks would head out to the frontier.
The South would go totally nuts, very good chance they were try to secede.

 

[Galba Otho Vitelius]

The Supreme Court that decided Dred Scott had a majority of justices from slave states, at least one of which was a slaveholder himself, and all five may have been slaveholders. One of these justices served in the Cabinet of Jefferson Davis.

Its pretty much impossible that this Supreme Court would have decided in favor of Scott. You would have to get all four Northerners plus Justice Wayne, the most reasonable of the southern jurists, to back the decision, and of the four northern members, two dissented, one thought that Scott moving to a free territory did not emancipate him, and so you are left with really only one potential switcher.

What Taney and his majority could have done was just rule that Scott had no ability to sue in federal court because he was not a US citizen and left it at that, without trying to invalidate the Missouri Compromise. That would have weakened the Republican Party and increased the chances of Douglas carrying enough states in the 1860 election to keep the Republican nominee (maybe not Lincoln ITTL though it probably would have been Lincoln) from getting an Electoral College majority. However, there were other issues fueling the Republicans and in fact Lincoln had a fairly comfortable popular vote majority in the free states, his getting a nationwide popular vote plurality was only due to his getting almost no votes at all in most slave states.

 

[Maniakes]

If they did rule in favor of Dred Scott, there would be a mass Exodus on slaves to northern states.

It's almost impossible that even a decision in Scott's favor would go that far. The Constitution explicitly provides for the return of runaway slaves, even if they escape to free states (Article IV, Section 2):

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 labor, but shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such service or labour may be due.

Scott's claim was based on his owner living in a free state (Illinois) and later a free territory (Iowa) for several years each, both times deliberately bringing Scott with him. That's a much narrower class of cases, and not much of a departure from the law as it had been understood pre-Dred Scott v Sanford.