Considering Slaughterhouse Cases - Essay Example

Essay Examining the history of certain U.S. Supreme Court rulings brings to mind the baseball cliché that “it’s not over until it’s over.” But unlike baseball, the Court works with rules that frequently change for many reasons, including because the umpires themselves have changed. Consider Slaughterhouse Cases, an 1873 ruling that addressed whether a certain Louisiana meatpacking law was in violation of the 13th and three clauses of the 14th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. Included in the Slaughterhouse Court’s 26,000 word opinion and three dissents were three brief references to Dred Scott v.

John Sanford, a case the Court had decided 16 years earlier.1 The two cases seem to have little in common. Dred Scott addressed certain controversial issues about race, including that slaves and their descendents could never be U.S. citizens. It had nothing to do with Louisiana or meatpacking, nor at the time of the ruling had the 13th and 14th Amendments yet been proposed, much less adopted. So the circumstances of the two cases seem unconnected.2 But scholars such as Hiroshi Fukurai note that the Slaughterhouse Court was able to connect the two cases “due to the passage of the 14th Amendment.

”3 That Amendment had been adopted in 1868, 11 years after the 1857 Dred Scott ruling and five years before Slaughterhouse, but the Supreme Court had not yet had an opportunity to interpret its meaning. Slaughterhouse presented the first opportunity, and thereby also created a path for the Court to revisit Dred Scott. The result was the Slaughterhouse Court declared Dred Scott to have been overruled five years earlier by the first clause in the 14th Amendment, which “declared [the negro] to be a citizen of the United States.

”4 As summarized by Donald Lively, “Five years after the [14th] amendment’s adoption, the Supreme Court seized an opportunity [in Slaughterhouse] to pass its own judgment on the extent to which state power and interests had been federalized.”5 In short, although it took several years, the Court in Slaughterhouse finally could return to Dred Scott via the path created by the 14th Amendment and, in so doing, substantially overturned it.6 During the U.S. Senate hearings on John Roberts’s nomination to be Chief Justice, he was asked what the Court should consider before overturning a prior case.

Roberts replied that “it is a jolt to the legal system to overrule a precedent” and listed several cautionary considerations. Nevertheless, he had earlier characterized Dred Scott as “perhaps the most egregious example of judicial activism in our history,”7 so perhaps he would have eagerly joined in returning to it. Bibliography Fehrenbacher, Don E. The Dred Scott Case: Its Significance in American Law and Politics. New York: Oxford UP, USA, 2001. Accessed at http://www.amazon.com/Dred-Scott-Case-Significance-American/dp/ 0195145887/ ref=sr_1_5?

ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1260633852&sr=1-5. Fukurai, Hiroshi, Edgar W. Butler and Richard Krooth. Race and the Jury: Racial Disenfranchisement and the Search for Justice. New York: Plenum, 1993. Accessed at http://www.amazon.com/Race-Jury-Racial-Disenfranchisement-Justice/dp/0306441446/ ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1260634010&sr=1-1. The Hearing of Judge John G. Roberts. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Senate, 2005. Accessed at http://www.asksam.com/ebooks/ releases.asp?doc=F&file=JGRHearing.ask Lively, Donald E.

Landmark Supreme Court Cases: A Reference Guide. Westport, Conn: Greenwood, 1999. Accessed at http://www.amazon.com/Landmark-Supreme-Court-Cases-Reference/dp/0313306028/ ref=sr_1_11?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1260368071&sr=1-11. Rosen, Jeffrey. The Most Democratic Branch: How the Courts Serve America. New York: Oxford UP, USA, 2006. Accessed at http://www.amazon.com/Most-Democratic-Branch-Foundation-Sunnylands/ dp/0195174437/ ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top. Slaughterhouse Cases. Supreme Court of the United States. 14 Apr.1873.

Accessed at http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0083_0036_ZO.html Essay 2 Salmon P. Chase was a highly accomplished, anti-slavery politician who served as Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court from his appointment by Lincoln in late 1864 until his death in 1873. His career included diverse and challenging roles, to some extent making Chase a Reconstruction-era version of Renaissance man. Scholars point to four roles that were particularly significant during that tumultuous period.

Presidential Counselor.1 Chase had counseled Abraham Lincoln and initially also advised Andrew Johnson. Niven documentsl that Chase concentrated on policies for implementing Reconstruction, about which Chase had strong views but Johnson was tentative. Johnson ultimately aligned himself elsewhere, but what one scholar calls Chase’s “one-man campaign for black suffrage,” was implemented.2 Perhaps due to conflicting political ambitions, Chase was not a close counselor to U.S. Grant. Chief Justice.

3 The end of the Civil War and collapse of the Confederacy left behind a morass of legal issues concerning slavery and the political nature of the former Confederate states. According to Hyman, despite being an activist with strong opinions about Reconstruction, Chase impartially led important Court decisions on economic (Turner, 1867) and political (Texas v. White, 1869) issues. These decisions helped shape the long term political form of the reconstructed Union. Presidential Prospect.4 Chase had enormous political ambitions intended to culminate in his election to the Presidency.

But once confirmed as Chief Justice, it was inappropriate for him to be active in partisan politics. Yet, because of his experience and political priorities, Chase was among the top Republican prospects for the 1868 election. He was also courted by the Democrats and later he courted them. Nevertheless, although retaining political influence, he was never nominated by either party. Presiding Judge, Johnson Impeachment Trial.5 The U.S. Constitution directs that the Chief Justice preside over a President’s impeachment trial, but provides no further details.

Because Johnson’s 1868 trial was the first ever, Chase recognized he would be setting critical precedents. Moreover, the trial would occur in the midst of severe partisan passions. Yet Blue concludes that Chase’s “conduct of the trial had clearly been that of an objective chief justice… [who]… courageously maintained his judicial independence in the face of heavy Republican pressure.” For the U.S., it arguably was Chase’s finest hour. Bibliography Blue, Frederick J. Salmon P.

Chase: A Life in Politics. (Kent, Ohio: Kent State UP) 1987. Accessed at http://books.google.com/books ?id=Wyxj7Y3Fh7AC&dq=salmon+p. +chase&printsec=frontcover&source=bl&ots=7PLF5eAqV1&sig=C1aRCr_8LPizkDeYNXM3XNazq_A&hl=en&ei=AUklS7jnApWENLC6neYJ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CA0Q6AEwATgK#v=onepage&q=impeachment&f=false Foner, Eric. Reconstruction: Americas Unfinished Revolution, 1863-1877. (New York: Perennial Classics) 2002. Accessed at http://www.amazon.com/Reconstruction-Americas-Unfinished-Revolution-1863-1877/dp/0060937165/ ref=sr_1_1?

ie=UTF8&qid=1260392276&sr=1-1-fkmr0 Hyman, Harold Melvin. Reconstruction Justice of Salmon P. Chase In Re: Turner and Texas v. White. (Lawrence, Kan: University of Kansas) 1997. Accessed at http://www.amazon.com/Reconstruction-Justice-Salmon-P-Chase/ dp/0700608354/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1260390348&sr=1-5 Niven, John. Salmon P. Chase: A Biography. (New York: Oxford UP) 1995. Accessed at http://www.amazon.com/Salmon-Chase-Biography-John-Niven/dp/ 0195046536/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1260390348&sr=1-1#reader_0195046536 Stewart, David O.

Impeached: The Trial of President Andrew Johnson and the Fight for Lincolns Legacy. (New York: Simon& Shuster) 2009. Accessed at http://www.amazon.com/ Impeached-President-Andrew-Johnson-Lincolns/dp/ 1416547495/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1260726764&sr=1-1 Essay 3 The Abraham Lincoln – Roger Taney relationship lasted only seven years when Taney died in 1864, but it occurred during a U.S. period of massive political danger. The scholarly consensus about the facts is that the relationship was highly contentious and revolved around Chief Justice Taney’s 1857 Dred Scott Ruling and President Lincoln’s 1861 suspension of the writ of habeas corpus.

But scholars differ, sometimes subtly, interpreting the relationship, and sometimes choose a side. Following are my analyses of interpretations from four U.S.scholars. All cited works date since 1995, and each of the scholars is a full professor and has published other work on American history. Thomas DiLorenzo Unlike Lincoln, Taney’s manner was measured: Taney merely “admonished” Lincoln about habeas corpus (p.136), but Lincoln was “outraged” when Taney had his Merryman ruling delivered personally to Lincoln. (p.137)1 Lincoln’s true motives were anti-democratic: Lincoln’s habeas corpus and martial law actions were plainly “unconstitutional” (p.137), and by suspending habeas corpus and ignoring Taney’s Merryman ruling, “Lincoln effectively trumped the judiciary and became a dictator…” (p.150) Richard Cawardine Lincoln had legitimate concerts about Taney’s true motivations: “it was only a matter of time before Taney…[would]…rule again [to nationalize] slavery. (p.78) Unlike Taney, Lincoln’s manner was measured: “Lincoln lamented that…Taney had recently reinterpreted the Declaration.” (p.82), and “Lincoln’s limited suspension of habeus corpus….

now had come under the hostile scrutiny of Roger Taney.” David Donald Unlike Taney, Lincoln’s manner was measured: Lincoln was reluctant to challenge Taney’s Dred Scott decision (p.200), and first spoke publicly three months later during a Douglas debate. (p.201); moreover, Taney’s ruling on Merryman included openly public “fulminations” against Lincoln. (p.303) Lincoln’s opinion of Taney was reasoned: he goal was to replace Taney with a Chief Justice “deeply versed in the law, rather than an ideologue or a theorist.” (p.551) James Oakes Taney was a “partisan democrat who fully shared his party’s desire to silence public discussion of slaver.” (p.32) Lincoln’s primary motivations were honorable: his comments on Dred Scott included “one of the most searing images he ever conjured up…[which] depicted the worsening condition of the African American as a nightmarish prison.” (p.78) Lincoln chose Chase as Chief Justice to “replace the hated Roger B. Taney”. (p.227) Surprisingly, a different scholar recently suggested that, “had they known each other in less perilous times, [Lincoln and Taney] might have been friends…or respectful adversaries…because they had so much in common.

” (Simon, p.1) Bibliography Carwardine, Richard. Lincoln: A Life of Purpose and Power. 1st ed. New York: Vintage, 2007. Accessed at http://www.amazon.com/Lincoln-Purpose-Power-Richard-Carwardine/dp/1400096022/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1260791603&sr=1-1 DiLorenzo, Thomas J. Real Lincoln: A New Look at Abraham Lincoln, His Agenda, and an Unnecessary War. New York: Three Rivers, 2003. Accessed at http://www.amazon.com/Real-Lincoln-Abraham-Agenda-Unnecessary/dp/0761526463/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1260791525&sr=1-1 Donald, David Herbert. Lincoln. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1995.

Oakes, James. The radical and the Republican: Frederick Douglass, Abraham Lincoln, and the triumph of antislavery politics. New York: W.W. Norton, 2007. Accessed at http://www.amazon.com/Radical-Republican-Frederick-Douglass-Antislavery/dp/0393061949/ref=reader_auth_dp Simon, James F. Lincoln and Chief Justice Taney: Slavery, Secession, and the Presidents War Powers. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2006. Accessed at http://books.simonandschuster.com/Lincoln-and-Chief-Justice-Taney/James-F-Simon/9780743250337 Essay 4 The 1876 Presidential election was stalemated by a close vote separating the Republicans and Democrats and charges of fraud and violence.

Democrats agreed to compromise wherein they would cede the victory to the Republican, Rutherford Hayes, pledge to protect black rights, and give other consideration. In return, Republicans agreed to remove federal troops from the South and provide federal aid for state home rule and various improvements. Not all the agreements were met, but most important, Hayes became president and the federal troops were removed. Termed the Compromise of 1877, it ended Reconstruction and proved devastating to blacks.

Black scholars have published interpretations of the Compromise and diverse selections are summarized below. Robert Davis “…the Compromise of 1877 represented the abandon­ment of southern freedmen by northern politicians. Without fear of direct federal interference, white southerners were now able to effectively restore white-rule and institutionalize Jim Crowism throughout the former Confederacy. The hapless black freed­men and their descendants ‘were condemned in the interests of sectional harmony to lives of poverty, indignity, and little hope.

’ (Davis, n.p.) 1 W.E.B. duBois In 1870, South Carolina began to create a free school system that made good progress through 1876, but it ended abruptly in 1877. “We may assume that had the reconstruction government not been overthrown in 1877, it would have given to the state an excellent school system.” (duBois, p.650) The new South Carolina governor had campaigned on “the specific promise to protect the negro in his civil rights. After 1877, this Southern gentleman made no attempt to keep his promise… [and] all sorts of fraud and intimidation kept the South Carolina negro from voting.

” (duBois, p.688) John Hope Franklin The Reconstruction period had been shorter than assumed and actually had been “overthrown” well before1877… few troops were left to withdraw…political polling places “were not readily open to blacks…blacks continued to have “no way to express their interests..” (Franklin, p.191) Fredrick L. McGhee After 1877, “civil rights protections fell more and more to the states and to the people generally, many of whom were not much interested in the subject.

By the early 1890s a full-scale counterrevolution against black rights controlled politics in the South…in plain violation of the 14th and 15th Amendments, and enacted the apartheid laws known as Jim Crow…lynching incidents were steeply on the rise. (p.25) Bibliography Davis, Jr., Robert W. "Compromise of 1877." African American History: Names and Terms. 27 Dec. 2007. Accessed at http://africanamericanhistorynamesandterms.blogspot.com. DuBois, W.E. B. Black Reconstruction in America, 1860-1880.

Paperback ed. New York: Free, 1998. Accessed at http://www.amazon.com/Black-Reconstruction-America-1860-1880-Burghardt/dp/0684856573/ ref=sr_1_19?ie=UTF8&s= books&qid=1260838696&sr=1-19 Franklin, John H. Reconstruction After the Civil War. Paperback ed. Chicago: The University of Chicago, 1994. Accessed at http://www.amazon.com/ Reconstruction-after-Civil-John-Franklin/dp/0226260798/ ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1260840422&sr=1-1 Nelson, Paul D. and Levering-Lewis, David. Fredrick L. McGhee: A Life on the Color Line, 1861-1912. St. Paul, MN: Minnesota Historical Society, 2002.

Accessed at http://www.amazon.com/ Fredrick-L-McGhee-Color-1861-1912/dp/0873514254