Transcripts For CSPAN Landmark Cases Landmark Cases - Scott

Quite often, most of our most famous decisions are ones that the court took that were unpopular. Lets go through a few cases that illustrate dramatically and visually what it means to live in a society of 310 million different people who stuck together because they believed in the rule of law. Cspan and the National Constitution Center Welcome you to the landmark cases. We explore the people and stories behind some of the Supreme Courts most famous decisions. Tonight you will be learning more about the dred scott decision. Let me introduce you about the two guests about the history. A professor and coeditor of a book of the dred scott case. Welcome to our program. Thank you for having me. Martha jones is from the university of michigan and the chair of the Africanamerican Studies Program at the law school. They can for having me. Blacks, whether free or slaves werent citizens of the United States. And they limited the spread of sliverry and saying congress didnt have the authority. So im going to set the table for us in the mid what was the 1860s. Background that gave rise to this case . There are a few things that are important for dred scott. 1850 marks a turning point in the nations thinking about slavery. What do i mean . Here the fugitive slave act is only totood through not enable southern slave holders to reach into the north, but it is said to nationalize slavery once again and make northerners complicit in the constitution. In the institution, even in those states that abolished slavery. Its probably the most important context. The Supreme Court decides which cases it will here. Why does it decide to take on the case of dred scott . . Saying, as she was this is a period of proslavery nationalism. This case allows the court to take on one of the most decisive questions of the day. Is america going to be a nationally slave state . The court can decide its questions but this is one that was going to be an issue for the court or the legislature or the president Going Forward and an opportunity to answer one of the more difficult questions. We are trying to find connectivity between the cases. Last was marbury versus madison , and this is 50 over 50 years later, and the first time the first time that the court uses the judicial review process, is that correct . That is correct. Recognizing that was a big step. It took 50 years for the court to do it again. Notice how the court does it within the most dramatic fashion. What really sets dred scott apart is the fact that it is the ultimate antipresident ial case. It is what you dont want to do. A cautionary tale. For the court to step in and exercise judicial review in this particular way in striking down the compromise in this climate, it was a bad political decision. Is it correct to say that, it even inside the Supreme Court the dred scott decision is one of the worst . Absolutely. You can talk to scholars and most will agree this was probably the most infamous Supreme Court decision. Critics say this was a court of the court overreaching and one, it doesnt have the capacity to resolve and in doing so, really damaging the courts reputation for years to come. There are consequences on the nation on the issue of slavery , but there are consequences on the court Going Forward. We are going to your a lot of names during the next 90 minutes, among them, a couple of dredost important are scott and hariot scott who were they . Dred scott was a slave to the blow family in the Hampton Roads family. They moved and he moved toll alabama to become farmers to buy cotton plantations and doesnt work out well. He moved to st. Louis missouri, in they move them to missouri 1830. And opened up a boarding house. The next year, Elizabeth Taylor died. In the following year, blow passes as well. Before he does, he make arrangements to sell dr emp d to dr. Emerson and the doctor connects him. We would get a chance to get in more detail and why they became the crux of this case and i will ask you briefly, and we will spend more time on it later, who was rodgeer taney . And taney is a former slave holder, a marylander, states map man ande man states Held Public Office in the state of maryland. He was attorney general for the state of maryland and attorney general for the United States and by the 180s, he becomes chief justice of the United States Supreme Court. He is a colonization and someone who advocates that a former slave cannot live peacebly in the United States and should be removed voluntarily to places like liberia. He is a catholic living in maryland and i think most important thinking about credit dred scott, before we get to 1857, it has beenal question on his mind since the 1820s and 1830s when as attorney general, he had begun to work out his theory about black citizenship, and we know his conclusion that black people cannot be citizens of the United States. But give some background to tell its a bit more about the United States. The total population in the 31 million plus people and there were about half a million free blacks in the United States. And today, the free blacks live in a certain part of the country . Free blacks, there were free blacks in the south and the north. A lot of times after emancipation, if a slave was emancipated, they would leave the jurisdiction, but they had family that kept them in the same place where they were slaves. It was not uncommon to find free blacks in the south and the north. In urban centers like st. Louis, like baltimore, we have across the increasingly across the country we have increasingly growing population of of africanamericans. Taney has the largest population in the country, 25,000 people. That helps us to begin to understand his touchspoken. And the decision they would make would affect the free states as well. Absolutely. These are men and women, and boys and girls who have been free who have been themselves claiming the status of citizens throughout the early decades of 19th century which makes it a terrible blow. They were not only claiming to be citizens, they voted for ratification of the constitution. It comes as quite a blow. Later on, we will involve you in the series that makes it interesting for us and the questions on your mind. And you can send us a tweet at cspan and hues the hashtag landmarkcases and be part of the facebook conversation and finally there will be phone lines where you can call in and we will put those numbers periodically. We will probably take calls within about 15 more minutes or so. The important part of the decision, with his master, he traveled into the territories that were declared free. We are going to learn about his time of that life. Our cameras went on location to the site that is located outside of st. Paul, minnesota and where this is where dred scott lived in free territory and married. Lets watch. During the timeframe of the scott being here, of the scotts being here you can , imagine, the soldiers drilling and muskets firing. I like to envision harriet was standing outside of the store over here. Maybe dred was walking over here and saw here. Saw her. Maybe wanted to introduce himself to her. The thing i like about that is we continue to put them and other enslaved people as people rather than obvious. Rather than objects. They had a ceremony that was off yated. The fact that dred and harriets marriage, was officiated, that is rare, it makes this place significant in that regard. Dred and harriet were enslaved people here on land where slavery wasnt legally recognized and that was one of the pieces of information that they used as the basis of their court case when they sued for their freedom in st. Louis. This is the place that we speak about. We refitted and outfitted the room. In accordance to what it would have what we believed it would have looked like. This room is actually their living quarters and interesting it is interesting because their living quarters are located directly under emerson space. So the master, his space is right above them. All the noise of what is happening upstairs, they could here it. We understand dred to be the personal valet or man servant , so he was the one who would emersons needs. Various types of duties that we find that he was possibly doing. Harriet, anything from cooking, sewing the laundry. That is what you found her doing as well. This was about 1836 or so and the scotts were living in this area. What is significant to know about that the world . When we talk about that timeframe, you talk about a. In which slavery still exists and people have a presumption of slavery. That hasnt changed. When they meet each other, they are both slaves to their masters. If they fall in love, they get married, there is an ambiguity there because they recognize they are enslaved, and yet, they are carringying on as if they are free. It is the time of almost transition. Not quite transition. As martha said earlier the , fugitive slave act of 1850 is really the point of which you saw sectional tension begin to rise. The beginning of that crescendo. This unusual for the time to agree to perform a marriage was this unusual for the time to agree to perform a marriage ceremony between them . I dont think so. Marriage cuts two ways. It is the affirmation of two individuals, the beginning of a life together, the making of a family, children, they know their story and it cuts two ways because marriage is a mechanism of social control. Perhaps, a slave is less inclined, for example, to run away if he or she is connected to a family unit and tied to other people. It is not a marriage that has legal weight, which is to say these two cannot claim ownership of their children, they cannot inherent from one another or enjoy the privileges of marriage and they develop a bond that is deep and lasts for decades. Dred scott, we left the story with emerson and he was in the military and traveled a lot which is one of the reasons that dred scott traveled a lot. Dred scott had many masters, would that have been common . That was less uncommon. He was a body man and a personal servant and those relationships tend to be more enduring. I think it would be unusual to see him hired out as he was hired out. Their first child was named after elijah. Dred scott was living a very different kind of life with dr. Emerson. Somewhere along the way, its got offered to buy his freedom from dr. Emerson. Slave would have where would of slave have gotten the means to do that . That is a great question. Legal knowledge between many enslaved people is circulating. Manyve freedoms slaves are producing their own freedoms with freedom suits. They learn about how to challenge it within their own circumstances. There is no formal mechanism for self purchase in a jurisdiction like missouri. To buy ones freedom requires the consent and accord with owner. Or emerson declined. Where were they gotten the information about filing the lawsuit and the money to do such a thing . Its an interesting thing. Freedom suits were not that uncommon. The antislavery bar, the lawyers that were litigating these cases, they were nonideological cases in many instances. ,hey were doing litigation almost like criminal defense work or Public Interest work today. The kind of work lawyers do, that not everybody does, that is part of the litigation experience. Saying, people are relatively sophisticated in missouri on the slavery question. That everybody is in support of slavery. Air having real conversations about what opportunities these people have to be free. Harriet received support from her reverent from her church who to give information about how to file the lawsuit. On twitter said, did his journey to educate him along the way . Do you think he had the opportunity to talk about people in different parts of the United States and the territory . I think yes. I think that begins at Fort Snelling when they are alone, that is not to say in the that is to say not in the company of the emersons. They are hired out to another household at Fort Snelling and while they labor and their wages go to the emersons, they enjoy an autonomy that speak to it. An economy that gives them the opportunity to speak to people. On the one hand, Fort Snelling is in minnesota, near st. Paul and terribly remote for people like harriet and dred, but it is on the other hand, it is an extraordinary crossroads where merchants, and native people are trading stories, trading information, and i wouldnt be surprised if thats where their Legal Education begins. Dred scott takes us to what court . Missouri state court. He originally files with the state court and its a fairly , typical cause of action. It. E are two elements to he claims, number one, that he is free and second, that he is being falsely imprisoned. There is an assault component that you claim you are being threatened and imprisonment and being held against your will. That was the typical format. Its the kind of case that was almost boiler plate. And you would go to court and out under the old writ system different that we would legitimate today. That we would have today. It didnt do his case so he wasnt able to file. Take youby video, we to the courthouse where they first fought the legal address. We welcome you to the same those old courthouse. The place where harriet and dred find a way through the legal system. We are in one of the grander courtrooms that survived in st. Louis old courthouse. We know in both of the dred scott trials, the same judge presided. He was the judge of the Circuit Court of st. Louis at the time and was being known as being somewhat favorable to these cases of enslaved persons who were suing in the courts to gain their freedom. It was a jury of 12 men and all of these men would have been white. Some of them may have been and probably were slave owners. So we have to think when the scotts came here in 1850 for a second trial and when the jury, having listened to the evidence decided that they should be set free, that the evidence must have been very persuasive. There was one of actually a little over 300 cases that were heard in the st. Louis courts about this same matter of enslaved persons trying to become free by petitioning the legal system. When the slaves came into the court and we know they were allowed to come into the court , by law, and sometimes people ask is that question, but this side of the room is where the prosecution would sit and this is where the slaves would have been. We are looking at the original petition that dred and Harriet Scott made to the court. Dred and harriet had separate petitions and they were put to go into one case that bore his name. And, an interesting thing the way the law was written at the an interesting thing in the way the law was written at the time, it specified some sort of abuse may have taken place and it was a thing where they may have been abused and enslaved by their owner. The bottom were there their signatures are marked. Neither dred nor harriet could read or write. So the person who drafted the petition would write their name and put his mark and then dred would put his cross or x in that space and the same with harriet. You can see they did the same thing over here with her mark. One of the places, if you are the road and in st. Louis you , can visit to learn more about the dred scott case. Ofant to show you a timeline the legal challenge in the state of missouri. First, 1846 is when it was in the county court. That is what we just saw. It was retried in 1850 in the same courtroom. Then it went onto the missouri Supreme Court in 1852 and then , finally 1854, it moved to the federal courts in st. Louis area for both of you, that set a question decided by the lower courts. What were the important aspects of the case for people to understand . The first part i would emphasize is the the lower court cases. The first trial, where there is a technicality. We need to understand the technicality. There are three different lawsuits. One for dred, one for harriet and one for the other two kids. The claim that dred made was that he was being falsely held against his will. Mr. Russell testifies, yes, i hired dred from mr. Emerson for a set amount of money. Held against hs will. On examination, it was revealed, it wasnt him but his wife. It was his wife, mrs. Russell hadnt testified at trial. Mr. Russells testimony was struck as hear say. There was no evidence that he was treated as a slave. So the case was dismissed. But the judge was sympathetic. The judge was sympathetic, so there was a retrial. At retrial, mr. Emerson testified he paid the mr. Emerson testified he paid the money. Mrs. Russell testified that she made the arrangements and dred scott was able to prevail at the state court level. Why did it go on to the missouri Supreme Court . That takes us back to a fundamental question why 1846. What is happening that the scotts waited to bring this freedom suit and i think there is a confluence of things. But for me, the most powerful thing is those girls. They had two young daughters. Something changes and throughout the litigation, the scotts keep the girls in hiding. They are prepared if necessary to defy a court order rather than to see them enslaved or at rifbling sold away. They are terribly vulnerable. Vulnerable being separated from their parents and sexual assault. There is something going on. What happens is that they win the second trial. The jury of white men in st. Louis white men declare them as free men. There is a lone dissenter who says, not so fast. We have decades of a precedent here and i at least for the dissenting view, argue that we should follow precedent and they should be free. Generally, the role of law in missouri is, once an enslaved person has lived on on free soil, they become a free person, even when they return to the slave state of missouri. Once free, always free. Why didnt it ended there . It is a great lesson in why people wait to bring freedom suits. They are not a sure thing. They never are. The changing politics of issouri, a high court that increasingly interested in closing the door to these sorts of suits. What we get, at the high court in missouri, a split decision. On the one hand, the majority of no, we are not obl