It would mean either changing the Constitution or the Supreme Court ignoring a part of the Constitution.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
Except he wasn't escaping. His master voluntarily took him to federal territories and the free state of Illinois. It'd long been established that if a slaveholder took the slave to free territory and remained there for some time, the slave became free. (Exactly how much time was a separate issue; they also had a "right of transit" which had stretched in some places to several months, but Scott was there for about four years.) Unfortunately, it'd also been established that the home state's courts controlled - and in this case, Missouri violated all law and precedent to rule against Scott.Since Article IV Section 2 of the Constitution said the following
It would mean either changing the Constitution or the Supreme Court ignoring a part of the Constitution.