Given LONG history of abortion opponents linking Roe v. Wade to Dred Scott, seems likely he withdrew it b/c of opposition from the right.
-
-
-
Here's a 1999 news release from the National Right to Life Committee: http://www.nrlc.org/archive/news/1999/NRL699/slave.html …pic.twitter.com/LV5eY6HFB4
-
Here's the relevant Dred Scott paragraph in the brief Kansas has now sought to withdraw: http://theusconstitution.org/sites/default/files/Hodes-Nauser-III-KSC-Response-Brief-to-ACLU-amicus-10-18-final.pdf …pic.twitter.com/JjrdFKSxRm
-
Meanwhile, this is starting to make a little more sense:https://twitter.com/mjs_DC/status/788866020530348032 …
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
.
@chrisgeidner It's on the level of citing Korematsu for establishing strict scrutiny. Like, find *any* other case. - 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
It was a bizarre citation but one wholly unrelated to the thing that makes Dred Scott controversial.
-
The part cited says slaves aren't part of the people given inalienable rights by the Declaration.
-
Seems pretty darn related.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
This is wild. Have you found the brief? Would love to see context. Did senior atty read the damn thing?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.