• AdmiralShat
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    62
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    Don’t forget that the south was trying to force the north ro send back escaped slaves, depite the north using their states rights to say no. The south would also send Bounty hunters to go kidnap free born black people to sell into slavery. So yeah, states rights was an issue. The right to identify people as human.

    But let’s not also forget that the confederate constitution had a passage that says that there will not be any laws capable of being passed that infringe on the right to own black people

    Article I Section 9(4) No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law denying or impairing the right of property in negro slaves shall be passed

    • Liz@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      From a purely constitutional standpoint the Fugitive Slave Act was just doubling down on language already in the Constitution, so states rights doesn’t apply.

      Article IV Section 2

      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.

      “State’s rights” is usually a bullshit argument unless it’s coming from an actual constitutional scholar and they’re probably not gonna use the phrase “state’s rights.” That being said, you know, fuck slavery and those who argued in its favor.