View Single Post
Old February 4, 2013, 08:15 PM   #11
Al Norris
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,563
Yes Tom, it did overturn Dred Scott. But that's not why the Court was infuriated.

The 1832 case of Barron v. Baltimore, the Court ruled that the Bill of Rights was codified against the Federal Government only and did not restrict the States, whatsoever.

It should be understood that the phrase, "Privileges and/or Immunities," was a term of art to describe both political and natural rights (in that order).

The 14th Amendment was designed to not only overturn Barron, but also include and incorporate all the Privileges or Immunities (of a US Citizen) as against the States and local governments. In doing this, it completely re-ordered the nature of federalism. That is what stuck in the craw of the Court.

By the way, for those of you that are so afraid that a newer (more liberal) Court would perhaps overturn the 5-4 Heller decision... Slaughter-House was a 5-4 decision that has been upheld as recently as the McDonald decision. Justice Thomas was the only Justice to side with Alan Gura in reinvigorating the P or I Clause of the 14A.
Al Norris is offline  
Page generated in 0.03789 seconds with 7 queries