The Unlikely Hero of <i>Dred Scott</i>: Benjamin Robbins Curtis and the Constitutional Law of Slavery

Maltz, Earl M.

Journal: Cardozo Law Review

Volume: 17

First Page: 1995

Year: 1996

Bluebook Citation: 17 CARDOZO L. REV. 1995 (1996)

Author: Earl M. Maltz: all 43 publications


Abstract

The standard account portrays Dred Scott v. Sandford as a story of villains and heroes. The villains are the members of the majority, led by Chief Justice Roger Brooke Taney, who concluded that descendants of slaves could never become citizens of the Union and that Congress could not outlaw slavery in the territories. The heroes, on the other hand, are the two dissenters, John McLean and Benjamin Robbins Curtis, who rejected these conclusions and determined that Scott should be deemed a free man. McLean's opinion, however, was not tightly reasoned and was rather clearly designed to advance his presidential ambitions; thus, Curtis has been most often portrayed as the embodiment of judicial virtue in Dred Scott.

Chat with this journal article using AI

Ask CiteLaw's AI Navigator anything about this journal article, verify citations, and research related authorities. Sign up for CiteLaw free today to get started.