Debunking the Un-Fair Campaign Myths – Part 2


The Un-Fair Campaign website urges the reader to “Stop it.” Their first link is titled “Learn how white privilege has historically disadvantaged people of color” and links the reader to AltoArizona’s website that lists the “History of Racist US Laws.”

The next several posts will examine each of these laws. Most importantly, we will examine who supported the laws and who was in opposition to them.

Fugitive Slave Act of 1793

Let’s examine who was responsible for finding it unconstitutional:

“The law remained intact until 1850, by which time the moral sentiment of the North against slavery had become aroused; the Liberty Party had been organized, the underground railroad had flourished and many northern men and women refused to act as slave catchers or assist in perpetuating slavery.”

Liberty Party -> Free Soil Party -> Republican Party,_1840%29

Of interest in this case is the US Supreme Court Chief Justice, Roger B. Taney:
“Angered by that opinion and unwilling to accept the logic of Chief Justice Taney who had written the infamous Dred Scott case, the Wisconsin Legislature passed a series of resolutions denouncing the actions of the U.S. Supreme Court as “an arbitrary act of power … without authority.”

More on the Dred Scott case:

Pro-Slavery Chief Justice Taney – Democrat
“We must look at the institution of slavery as publicists, and not as casuists. It is a question of law, and not a case of conscience.”—Roger Brooke Taney

Debunking the Un-Fair Campaign Myths – Part 1
Debunking the Un-Fair Campaign Myths – Part 3

One comment

  1. Johnc955 says:

    I just ought to tell you which you have written an exceptional and distinctive post that I really enjoyed reading. Im fascinated by how nicely you laid out your material and presented your views. Thank you. geadgegfgfde

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *