“A further painful outcome of the Dred Scott decision was that it declared the Missouri Compromise unconstitutional, thus permitting slavery in territory where it was formerly prohibited and holding that Congress could not prohibit slavery in the newly emerging states. The Court believed that ‘the right of property in a slave is distinctly and expressly affirmed in the Constitution’ and, thus, the slaveholders’ rights must be protected. Accordingly, the Court held that the Compromise, which in effect sought to deprive slaveholders of their property ‘could hardly be dignified with the name of due process of law.’ With the demise of the Compromise, the southerners who desired a national system of slavery were granted a substantial step toward having their dream actualized. The Court seemed to function as an extension of the southern slaveholding regime, lending legal support and credence to the institution of slavery. “
Source: Charles J. Ogletree, Jr. From Dred Scott to Barack Obama: The Ebb and Flow of Race Jurisprudence. 25 Harvard Blackletter L. J. 11. 2009.
Me Against Iniquity: Understanding the Complexities of Global White Supremacy (Racism) Through The Eyes of an Unapologetically BLACK Intellectual 