Jump to content
 







Main menu
   


Navigation  



Main page
Contents
Current events
Random article
About Wikipedia
Contact us
Donate
 




Contribute  



Help
Learn to edit
Community portal
Recent changes
Upload file
 








Search  

































Create account

Log in
 









Create account
 Log in
 




Pages for logged out editors learn more  



Contributions
Talk
 



















Contents

   



(Top)
 


1 Nominative reports  



1.1  Benjamin Chew Howard  







2 Justices of the Supreme Court at the time of 60 U.S. (19 How.)  





3 Notable Case in 60 U.S. (19 How.)  



3.1  Scott v. Sanford  







4 Citation style  





5 List of cases in 60 U.S. (19 How.)  





6 Notes and references  





7 External links  














List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 60: Difference between revisions







Add links
 









Article
Talk
 

















Read
Edit
View history
 








Tools
   


Actions  



Read
Edit
View history
 




General  



What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Cite this page
Get shortened URL
Download QR code
Wikidata item
 




Print/export  



Download as PDF
Printable version
 




Print/export  



















Appearance
   

 





Coordinates: 38°5326N 77°0016W / 38.89056°N 77.00444°W / 38.89056; -77.00444

Help
 

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 


Browse history interactively
 Previous editNext edit 
Content deleted Content added
Restored revision 1039633856 by Ballinacurra Weston (talk)
Tags: Twinkle Undo Reverted
Reverted 1 edit by TJRC (talk): Unnecessary change
Tags: Twinkle Undo Reverted
Line 21: Line 21:

This is a '''list of the 61 cases reported in volume 60 (19 How.) of ''[[United States Reports]]''''', decided by the [[Supreme Court of the United States]] from December 1856 to March 1857.<ref>Anne Ashmore, ''DATES OF SUPREME COURT DECISIONS AND ARGUMENTS'', Library, Supreme Court of the United States, 26 December 2018.</ref>

This is a '''list of the 61 cases reported in volume 60 (19 How.) of ''[[United States Reports]]''''', decided by the [[Supreme Court of the United States]] from December 1856 to March 1857.<ref>Anne Ashmore, ''DATES OF SUPREME COURT DECISIONS AND ARGUMENTS'', Library, Supreme Court of the United States, 26 December 2018.</ref>

== Nominative reports ==

== Nominative reports ==

In 1874, the U.S. government created the ''United States Reports'', and retroactively numbered older privately-published [[Law report|case reports]] as part of the new series. As a result, cases appearing in volumes 1–90 of ''U.S. Reports'' have dual [[Case citation|citation forms]]; one for the volume number of ''U.S. Reports'', and one for the volume number of the reports named for the relevant reporter of decisions (these are called "[[Nominate reports|nominative reports]]").

In 1874, the U.S. government created the ''United States Reports'', and retroactively numbered older privately-published [[Law report|case reports]] as part of the new series. As a result, cases appearing in volumes 1–90 of ''U.S. Reports'' have dual [[Case citation|citation forms]]; one for the volume number of ''U.S. Reports'', and one for the volume number of the reports named for the relevant reporter of decisions (these are called [[Nominate reports|nominative reports]]).

=== Benjamin Chew Howard ===

=== Benjamin Chew Howard ===

Starting with the 42nd volume of ''U.S. Reports'', the [[Reporter of Decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States]] was [[Benjamin Chew Howard]]. Howard was Reporter of Decisions from 1843 to 1860, covering volumes 42 through 65 of ''United States Reports'' which correspond to volumes 1 through 24 of his ''Howard's Reports''. As such, the dual form of citation to, for example, ''Lathrop v. Judson'' is 60 U.S. (19 How.) 66 (1857).

Starting with the 42nd volume of ''U.S. Reports'', the [[Reporter of Decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States]] was [[Benjamin Chew Howard]]. Howard was Reporter of Decisions from 1843 to 1860, covering volumes 42 through 65 of ''United States Reports'' which correspond to volumes 1 through 24 of his ''Howard’s Reports''. As such, the dual form of citation to, for example, ''Lathrop v. Judson'' is 60 U.S. (19 How.) 66 (1857).



== Justices of the Supreme Court at the time of 60 U.S. (19 How.) ==

== Justices of the Supreme Court at the time of 60 U.S. (19 How.) ==

Line 29: Line 29:

{{see also|List of justices of the Supreme Court of the United States by court composition}}

{{see also|List of justices of the Supreme Court of the United States by court composition}}

{{see also|Taney Court}}

{{see also|Taney Court}}

The Supreme Court is established by [[Article Three of the United States Constitution|Article III, Section 1]] of the [[Constitution of the United States]], which says: "The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court . . .". The size of the Court is not specified; the Constitution leaves it to [[Congress of the United States|Congress]] to set the number of justices. Under the [[Judiciary Act of 1789]] Congress originally fixed the number of justices at six (one chief justice and five associate justices).<ref>{{cite web|url=https://guides.ll.georgetown.edu/supreme_court|title=Supreme Court Research Guide |access-date=7 April 2021 |publisher=Georgetown Law Library}}</ref> Since 1789 Congress has varied the size of the Court from six to [[Seventh Circuit Act of 1807|seven]], [[Eighth and Ninth Circuits Act of 1837|nine]], [[Tenth Circuit Act of 1863|ten]], and back to [[Judiciary Act of 1869|nine]] justices (always including one chief justice). When the cases in 60 U.S. (19 How.) were decided the Court comprised these nine members:

The Supreme Court is established by [[Article Three of the United States Constitution|Article III, Section 1]] of the [[Constitution of the United States]], which says: ”The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court . . .. The size of the Court is not specified; the Constitution leaves it to [[Congress of the United States|Congress]] to set the number of justices. Under the [[Judiciary Act of 1789]] Congress originally fixed the number of justices at six (one chief justice and five associate justices).<ref>{{cite web|url=https://guides.ll.georgetown.edu/supreme_court|title=Supreme Court Research Guide |access-date=7 April 2021 |publisher=Georgetown Law Library}}</ref> Since 1789 Congress has varied the size of the Court from six to [[Seventh Circuit Act of 1807|seven]], [[Eighth and Ninth Circuits Act of 1837|nine]], [[Tenth Circuit Act of 1863|ten]], and back to [[Judiciary Act of 1869|nine]] justices (always including one chief justice). When the cases in 60 U.S. (19 How.) were decided the Court comprised these nine members:

{| class="wikitable sortable"

{| class="wikitable sortable"

|-

|-

Line 91: Line 91:

}}

}}

===''Scott v. Sanford''===

===''Scott v. Sanford''===

''[[Scott v. Sandford]]'', [https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/87116/dred-scott-v-sandford/?q=%2260%20U.S.%20393%22&type=o&order_by=score%20desc&stat_Precedential=on&filed_after=01%2F01%2F1856&filed_before=01%2F01%2F1858&court=scotus 60 U.S. (19 How.) 393 (1857)], is likely the most notorious and widely-condemned decision in the history of the US Supreme Court. In it, the Court held that the [[US Constitution]] was not meant to include [[American citizenship]] for [[black people]], regardless of whether they were enslaved or free, and so the rights and privileges that the Constitution confers upon American citizens could not apply to them. Although Chief Justice [[Roger Taney]] and several of the other justices hoped that the decision would permanently settle the slavery controversy, which was increasingly dividing the American public, the decision's effect was the opposite. Taney's majority opinion suited the slaveholding states, but was intensely decried in the other states. The decision inflamed the national debate over slavery and deepened the divide that led ultimately to the [[American Civil War|Civil War]]. In 1865, after the Union won the Civil War, the ''Dred Scott'' ruling was voided by the [[Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution|Thirteenth Amendment]] to the US Constitution, which abolished slavery except as punishment for a crime, and the [[Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution|Fourteenth Amendment]], which guaranteed citizenship for "all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof". The Supreme Court's decision has been continuously denounced ever since, both for its overt racism and its role in the near destruction of the [[United States]] four years later.<ref>{{cite web |title=

''[[Scott v. Sandford]]'', [https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/87116/dred-scott-v-sandford/?q=%2260%20U.S.%20393%22&type=o&order_by=score%20desc&stat_Precedential=on&filed_after=01%2F01%2F1856&filed_before=01%2F01%2F1858&court=scotus 60 U.S. (19 How.) 393 (1857)], is likely the most notorious and widely-condemned decision in the history of the US Supreme Court. In it, the Court held that the [[US Constitution]] was not meant to include [[American citizenship]] for [[black people]], regardless of whether they were enslaved or free, and so the rights and privileges that the Constitution confers upon American citizens could not apply to them. Although Chief Justice [[Roger Taney]] and several of the other justices hoped that the decision would permanently settle the slavery controversy, which was increasingly dividing the American public, the decision’s effect was the opposite. Taney’s majority opinion suited the slaveholding states, but was intensely decried in the other states. The decision inflamed the national debate over slavery and deepened the divide that led ultimately to the [[American Civil War|Civil War]]. In 1865, after the Union won the Civil War, the ''Dred Scott'' ruling was voided by the [[Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution|Thirteenth Amendment]] to the US Constitution, which abolished slavery except as punishment for a crime, and the [[Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution|Fourteenth Amendment]], which guaranteed citizenship for ”all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof”. The Supreme Court's decision has been continuously denounced ever since, both for its overt racism and its role in the near destruction of the [[United States]] four years later.<ref>{{cite web |title=

Ranking the 10 Worst Supreme Court Decisions of All-Time |url=https://moneyinc.com/worst-supreme-court-decisions/ |first=Garrett |last=Parker |publisher=[[Money Inc.]] |year=2019 |access-date=June 10, 2021}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=13 Worst Supreme Court Decisions of All Time |url=https://blogs.findlaw.com/supreme_court/2015/10/13-worst-supreme-court-decisions-of-all-time.html |author=Staff |publisher=[[FindLaw]] |date=October 14, 2015 |access-date=June 10, 2021}}</ref> Bernard Schwartz said that it "stands first in any list of the worst Supreme Court decisions—Chief Justice [[Charles Evans Hughes|Hughes]] called it the Court's greatest self-inflicted wound."<ref>{{cite book |author=Bernard Schwartz |title=A Book of Legal Lists: The Best and Worst in American Law |url=https://archive.org/details/bookoflegallists0000schw |url-access=registration |year=1997 |publisher=[[Oxford University Press]] |page=[https://archive.org/details/bookoflegallists0000schw/page/70 70]}}</ref> [[Junius P. Rodriguez]] wrote that it is "universally condemned as the U.S. Supreme Court's worst decision".<ref>{{cite book |author=Junius P. Rodriguez |title=Slavery in the United States: A Social, Political, and Historical Encyclopedia |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=4X44KbDBl9gC&pg=RA1-PA265 |year=2007 |publisher=ABC-CLIO |page=1|isbn=9781851095445 }}</ref> Historian David Thomas Konig agrees that it was "unquestionably, our court's worst decision ever."<ref>{{cite book |author=David Konig |title=The Dred Scott Case: Historical and Contemporary Perspectives on Race and Law |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=KFOD1NwZtWUC&pg=PA213 |year=2010 |publisher=Ohio University Press |page=213 |isbn=9780821419120 |display-authors=etal}}</ref>

Ranking the 10 Worst Supreme Court Decisions of All-Time |url=https://moneyinc.com/worst-supreme-court-decisions/ |first=Garrett |last=Parker |publisher=[[Money Inc.]] |year=2019 |access-date=June 10, 2021}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=13 Worst Supreme Court Decisions of All Time |url=https://blogs.findlaw.com/supreme_court/2015/10/13-worst-supreme-court-decisions-of-all-time.html |author=Staff |publisher=[[FindLaw]] |date=October 14, 2015 |access-date=June 10, 2021}}</ref> Bernard Schwartz said that it ”stands first in any list of the worst Supreme Court decisions—Chief Justice [[Charles Evans Hughes|Hughes]] called it the Court's greatest self-inflicted wound”.<ref>{{cite book |author=Bernard Schwartz |title=A Book of Legal Lists: The Best and Worst in American Law |url=https://archive.org/details/bookoflegallists0000schw |url-access=registration |year=1997 |publisher=[[Oxford University Press]] |page=[https://archive.org/details/bookoflegallists0000schw/page/70 70]}}</ref> [[Junius P. Rodriguez]] wrote that it is ”universally condemned as the U.S. Supreme Court's worst decision”.<ref>{{cite book |author=Junius P. Rodriguez |title=Slavery in the United States: A Social, Political, and Historical Encyclopedia |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=4X44KbDBl9gC&pg=RA1-PA265 |year=2007 |publisher=ABC-CLIO |page=1|isbn=9781851095445 }}</ref> Historian David Thomas Konig agrees that it was ”unquestionably, our court's worst decision ever”.<ref>{{cite book |author=David Konig |title=The Dred Scott Case: Historical and Contemporary Perspectives on Race and Law |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=KFOD1NwZtWUC&pg=PA213 |year=2010 |publisher=Ohio University Press |page=213 |isbn=9780821419120 |display-authors=etal}}</ref>



== Citation style ==

== Citation style ==

Line 101: Line 101:


[[Bluebook]] citation style is used for case names, citations, and jurisdictions.

[[Bluebook]] citation style is used for case names, citations, and jurisdictions.

* "C.C.D." = United States Circuit Court for the District of . . .

* ”C.C.D. = United States Circuit Court for the District of . . .

** ''e.g.,''"C.C.D.N.J." = United States Circuit Court for the District of New Jersey

** ''e.g.,''”C.C.D.N.J. = United States Circuit Court for the District of New Jersey

* "D." = United States District Court for the District of . . .

* ”D. = United States District Court for the District of . . .

** ''e.g.,''"D. Mass." = [[United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts]]

** ''e.g.,''”D. Mass. = [[United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts]]

* "E." = Eastern; "M." = Middle; "N." = Northern; "S." = Southern; "W." = Western

* ”E. = Eastern; ”M. = Middle; ”N. = Northern; ”S. = Southern; ”W. = Western

** ''e.g.,''"C.C.S.D.N.Y." = United States Circuit Court for the Southern District of New York

** ''e.g.,''”C.C.S.D.N.Y. = United States Circuit Court for the Southern District of New York

** ''e.g.,''"M.D. Ala." = [[United States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama]]

** ''e.g.,''”M.D. Ala. = [[United States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama]]

* "Adm." = [[Admiralty Court]] (a federal court)

* ”Adm. = [[Admiralty Court]] (a federal court)

* "Ct. Cl." = [[United States Court of Claims]]

* ”Ct. Cl. = [[United States Court of Claims]]

* "C.P." = [[Court of Common Pleas]] (a state court)

* ”C.P. = [[Court of Common Pleas]] (a state court)

* The abbreviation of a state's name alone indicates the highest appellate court in that state's judiciary at the time.

* The abbreviation of a state's name alone indicates the highest appellate court in that state’s judiciary at the time.

** ''e.g.,''"Pa." = [[Supreme Court of Pennsylvania]]

** ''e.g.,''”Pa. = [[Supreme Court of Pennsylvania]]

** ''e.g.,''"Me." = [[Supreme Judicial Court of Maine]]

** ''e.g.,''”Me. = [[Supreme Judicial Court of Maine]]



== List of cases in 60 U.S. (19 How.) ==

== List of cases in 60 U.S. (19 How.) ==

{| class="wikitable sortable"

{| class="wikitable sortable"

|-

|-

! scope="col" style="width: 400px;" | Case Name

! scope="col" style="width: 350px;" | Case Name

! scope="col" style="width: 75px;" | Page & year

! scope="col" style="width: 75px;" | Page & year

! scope="col" style="width: 10px;" | Opinion of the Court

! scope="col" style="width: 10px;" | Opinion of the Court

! scope="col" style="width: 150px;" | Concurring opinion(s)

! scope="col" style="width: 100px;" | Concurring opinion(s)

! scope="col" style="width: 100px;" | Dissenting opinion(s)

! scope="col" style="width: 116px;" | Dissenting opinion(s)

! scope="col" style="width: 116px;" | Lower court

! scope="col" style="width: 133px;" | Lower court

! scope="col" style="width: 200px;" | Disposition of case

! scope="col" style="width: 250px;" | Disposition of case

|-

|-

| ''Prevost v. Greneaux''

| ''Prevost v. Greneaux''

Line 262: Line 262:

| affirmed

| affirmed

|-

|-

| ''Long v. O'Fallon''

| ''Long v. O’Fallon''

| align="right"|[https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/87074/long-v-ofallon/?q=%2260%20U.S.%20116%20%22&type=o&order_by=score%20desc&stat_Precedential=on&filed_after=01%2F01%2F1856&filed_before=01%2F01%2F1858&court=scotus 116 (1856)]

| align="right"|[https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/87074/long-v-ofallon/?q=%2260%20U.S.%20116%20%22&type=o&order_by=score%20desc&stat_Precedential=on&filed_after=01%2F01%2F1856&filed_before=01%2F01%2F1858&court=scotus 116 (1856)]

| Campbell

| Campbell

Line 358: Line 358:

| affirmed

| affirmed

|-

|-

| ''New York & Virginia S.S. Co. v. Calderwood''

| ''N.Y. & Va. S.S. Co. v. Calderwood''

| align="right"|[https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/87086/new-york-and-virginia-steamship-v-ezra-calderwood/?q=%2260%20U.S.%20241%20%22&type=o&order_by=score%20desc&stat_Precedential=on&filed_after=01%2F01%2F1856&filed_before=01%2F01%2F1858&court=scotus 241 (1857)]

| align="right"|[https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/87086/new-york-and-virginia-steamship-v-ezra-calderwood/?q=%2260%20U.S.%20241%20%22&type=o&order_by=score%20desc&stat_Precedential=on&filed_after=01%2F01%2F1856&filed_before=01%2F01%2F1858&court=scotus 241 (1857)]

| Campbell

| Campbell

Line 438: Line 438:

| affirmed

| affirmed

|-

|-

| ''Garrison v. Memphis Insurance Co.''

| ''Garrison v. Memphis Ins. Co.''

| align="right"|[https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/87096/garrison-v-memphis-insurance-company/?q=%2260+U.S.%22&type=o&order_by=dateFiled+asc&stat_Precedential=on&filed_after=01%2F01%2F1856&filed_before=01%2F01%2F1858&court=scotus&page=3 312 (1857)]

| align="right"|[https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/87096/garrison-v-memphis-insurance-company/?q=%2260+U.S.%22&type=o&order_by=dateFiled+asc&stat_Precedential=on&filed_after=01%2F01%2F1856&filed_before=01%2F01%2F1858&court=scotus&page=3 312 (1857)]

| Campbell

| Campbell

Line 446: Line 446:

| affirmed

| affirmed

|-

|-

| ''Commercial Mutual Marine Insurance Co. v. Union Mutual Insurance Co.''

| ''Commercial Mut. Marine Ins. v. Union Mut. Ins.''

| align="right"|[https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/87097/commercial-mut-marine-ins-co-v-union-mut-ins-co-of-ny/?q=%2260%20U.S.318%22&type=o&order_by=dateFiled%20asc&stat_Precedential=on&filed_after=01%2F01%2F1856&filed_before=01%2F01%2F1858&court=scotus 318 (1857)]

| align="right"|[https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/87097/commercial-mut-marine-ins-co-v-union-mut-ins-co-of-ny/?q=%2260%20U.S.318%22&type=o&order_by=dateFiled%20asc&stat_Precedential=on&filed_after=01%2F01%2F1856&filed_before=01%2F01%2F1858&court=scotus 318 (1857)]

| Curtis

| Curtis

Line 558: Line 558:

| affirmed

| affirmed

|-

|-

| ''[[Michigan Central Railroad|Michigan Central R.R. Co.]] v. [[Lake Shore and Michigan Southern Railway|Michigan Southern R.R. Co.]]''

| ''[[Michigan Central Railroad|Michigan Cent. R.R. Co.]] v. [[Lake Shore and Michigan Southern Railway|Michigan S.R.R. Co.]]''

| align="right"|[https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/87110/michigan-central-railroad-co-v-mich-s-rd-co/?q=%2260+U.S.%22&type=o&order_by=dateFiled+asc&stat_Precedential=on&filed_after=01%2F01%2F1856&filed_before=01%2F01%2F1858&court=scotus&page=3 378 (1857)]

| align="right"|[https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/87110/michigan-central-railroad-co-v-mich-s-rd-co/?q=%2260+U.S.%22&type=o&order_by=dateFiled+asc&stat_Precedential=on&filed_after=01%2F01%2F1856&filed_before=01%2F01%2F1858&court=scotus&page=3 378 (1857)]

| Grier

| Grier


Revision as of 03:26, 17 November 2021

Supreme Court of the United States
Map
38°53′26N 77°00′16W / 38.89056°N 77.00444°W / 38.89056; -77.00444
EstablishedMarch 4, 1789; 235 years ago (1789-03-04)[1]
LocationWashington, D.C.
Coordinates38°53′26N 77°00′16W / 38.89056°N 77.00444°W / 38.89056; -77.00444
Composition methodPresidential nomination with Senate confirmation
Authorized byConstitution of the United States
Judge term lengthLife tenure
Number of positions9 (by statute)
Websitesupremecourt.gov
Chief Justice of the United States
CurrentlyJohn Roberts
SinceSeptember 29, 2005; 18 years ago (2005-09-29)

This is a list of the 61 cases reported in volume 60 (19 How.) of United States Reports, decided by the Supreme Court of the United States from December 1856 to March 1857.[2]

Nominative reports

In 1874, the U.S. government created the United States Reports, and retroactively numbered older privately-published case reports as part of the new series. As a result, cases appearing in volumes 1–90 of U.S. Reports have dual citation forms; one for the volume number of U.S. Reports, and one for the volume number of the reports named for the relevant reporter of decisions (these are called ”nominative reports”).

Benjamin Chew Howard

Starting with the 42nd volume of U.S. Reports, the Reporter of Decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States was Benjamin Chew Howard. Howard was Reporter of Decisions from 1843 to 1860, covering volumes 42 through 65 of United States Reports which correspond to volumes 1 through 24 of his Howard’s Reports. As such, the dual form of citation to, for example, Lathrop v. Judson is 60 U.S. (19 How.) 66 (1857).

Justices of the Supreme Court at the time of 60 U.S. (19 How.)

The Supreme Court is established by Article III, Section 1 of the Constitution of the United States, which says: ”The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court . . .”. The size of the Court is not specified; the Constitution leaves it to Congress to set the number of justices. Under the Judiciary Act of 1789 Congress originally fixed the number of justices at six (one chief justice and five associate justices).[3] Since 1789 Congress has varied the size of the Court from six to seven, nine, ten, and back to nine justices (always including one chief justice). When the cases in 60 U.S. (19 How.) were decided the Court comprised these nine members:

Portrait Justice Office Home State Succeeded Date confirmed by the Senate
(Vote)
Tenure on Supreme Court
Roger B. Taney Chief Justice Maryland John Marshall March 15, 1836
(29–15)
March 28, 1836

October 12, 1864
(Died)
John McLean Associate Justice Ohio Robert Trimble March 7, 1829
(Acclamation)
January 11, 1830

April 4, 1861
(Died)
James Moore Wayne Associate Justice Georgia William Johnson January 9, 1835
(Acclamation)
January 14, 1835

July 5, 1867
(Died)
John Catron Associate Justice Tennessee newly-created seat March 8, 1837
(28–15)
May 1, 1837

May 30, 1865
(Died)
Peter Vivian Daniel Associate Justice Virginia Philip P. Barbour March 2, 1841
(25–5)
January 10, 1842

May 31, 1860
(Died)
Samuel Nelson Associate Justice New York Smith Thompson February 14, 1845
(Acclamation)
February 27, 1845

November 28, 1872
(Retired)
Robert Cooper Grier Associate Justice Pennsylvania Henry Baldwin August 4, 1846
(Acclamation)
August 10, 1846

January 31, 1870
(Retired)
Benjamin Robbins Curtis Associate Justice Massachusetts

Levi Woodbury

December 20, 1851
(Acclamation)
October 10, 1851

September 30, 1857
(Resigned)
John Archibald Campbell Associate Justice Alabama John McKinley March 22, 1853
(Acclamation)
April 11, 1853

April 30, 1861
(Resigned)

Notable Case in 60 U.S. (19 How.)

Dred and Harriet Scott (top) and their children, Eliza and Lizzie

Scott v. Sanford

Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. (19 How.) 393 (1857), is likely the most notorious and widely-condemned decision in the history of the US Supreme Court. In it, the Court held that the US Constitution was not meant to include American citizenship for black people, regardless of whether they were enslaved or free, and so the rights and privileges that the Constitution confers upon American citizens could not apply to them. Although Chief Justice Roger Taney and several of the other justices hoped that the decision would permanently settle the slavery controversy, which was increasingly dividing the American public, the decision’s effect was the opposite. Taney’s majority opinion suited the slaveholding states, but was intensely decried in the other states. The decision inflamed the national debate over slavery and deepened the divide that led ultimately to the Civil War. In 1865, after the Union won the Civil War, the Dred Scott ruling was voided by the Thirteenth Amendment to the US Constitution, which abolished slavery except as punishment for a crime, and the Fourteenth Amendment, which guaranteed citizenship for ”all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof”. The Supreme Court's decision has been continuously denounced ever since, both for its overt racism and its role in the near destruction of the United States four years later.[4][5] Bernard Schwartz said that it ”stands first in any list of the worst Supreme Court decisions—Chief Justice Hughes called it the Court's greatest self-inflicted wound”.[6] Junius P. Rodriguez wrote that it is ”universally condemned as the U.S. Supreme Court's worst decision”.[7] Historian David Thomas Konig agrees that it was ”unquestionably, our court's worst decision ever”.[8]

Citation style

Under the Judiciary Act of 1789 the federal court structure at the time comprised District Courts, which had general trial jurisdiction; Circuit Courts, which had mixed trial and appellate (from the US District Courts) jurisdiction; and the United States Supreme Court, which had appellate jurisdiction over the federal District and Circuit courts—and for certain issues over state courts. The Supreme Court also had limited original jurisdiction (i.e., in which cases could be filed directly with the Supreme Court without first having been heard by a lower federal or state court). There were one or more federal District Courts and/or Circuit Courts in each state, territory, or other geographical region.

Bluebook citation style is used for case names, citations, and jurisdictions.

List of cases in 60 U.S. (19 How.)

Case Name Page & year Opinion of the Court Concurring opinion(s) Dissenting opinion(s) Lower court Disposition of case
Prevost v. Greneaux 1 (1857) Taney none none La. affirmed
Morgan v. Curtenius 8 (1857) Taney none none C.C.D. Ill. continued
Ex parte Secombe 9 (1857) Taney none none Sup. Ct. Terr. Minn. mandamus denied
Shaffer v. Scudday 16 (1857) Taney none none La. dismissed for want of jurisdiction
Thomas v. Osborn 22 (1856) Curtis none Taney C.C.D. Md. remanded for dismissal
Ure v. Coffman 56 (1857) Wayne none none C.C.E.D. La. affirmed
Stevens v. Gladding 64 (1857) McLean none none C.C.D.R.I. affirmed
Lathrop v. Judson 66 (1857) McLean none none C.C.E.D. La. affirmed
Moore v. Greene 69 (1856) McLean none none C.C.D.R.I. affirmed
Betts v. Lewis 72 (1857) Curtis none none N.D. Ala. remanded to amend pleadings
United States v. le Baron 73 (1856) Curtis none none C.C.S.D. Ala. reversed
Willot v. Sandford 79 (1856) Catron none none C.C.D. Mo. reversed
Vandewater v. Mills 82 (1857) Grier none none C.C.D. Cal. affirmed
The Brig Neurea 92 (1856) Grier none none N.D. Cal. reversed
Seymour v. McCormick 96 (1857) Nelson none none C.C.N.D.N.Y. affirmed
The Steamer St. Charles 108 (1857) Nelson none none C.C.E.D. La. reversed
Coiron v. Millaudon 113 (1857) Nelson none none C.C.E.D. La. affirmed
Long v. O’Fallon 116 (1856) Campbell none none C.C.D. Mo. affirmed
Baker v. Nachtrieb 126 (1856) Campbell none none C.C.W.D. Pa. reversed
Meegan v. Boyle 130 (1857) McLean none none C.C.D. Mo. affirmed
Post v. Jones 150 (1857) Grier none none C.C.S.D.N.Y. reversed
E.I. Dupont de Nemours Co. v. Vance 162 (1857) Curtis none Campbell C.C.E.D. La. reversed
The Steamer Virginia 182 (1857) Taney none none C.C.D. Md. dismissed
Brown v. Duchesne 183 (1857) Taney none none C.C.D. Mass. affirmed
Mordecai v. Lindsay 199 (1857) Wayne none none C.C.D.S.C. reversed
Cousin v. Labatut 202 (1857) Catron none none La. reversed
Hartshorn v. Day 211 (1857) Nelson none none C.C.D.R.I. reversed
Slater v. Emerson 224 (1857) McLean none none C.C.D. Mass. reversed
Schuchardt v. Babbidge 239 (1857) Nelson none none C.C.S.D.N.Y. affirmed
N.Y. & Va. S.S. Co. v. Calderwood 241 (1857) Campbell none none C.C.S.D.N.Y. affirmed
Williams v. Hill McLane & Co. 246 (1857) Campbell none none M.D. Ala. affirmed
Bell v. Hearne 252 (1857) Campbell none none La. reversed
Richardson v. City of Boston 263 (1857) Grier none none C.C.D.R.I. reversed
Hipp v. Babin 271 (1857) Campbell none none C.C.E.D. La. affirmed
Wolfe v. Lewis 280 (1857) McLean none none N.D. Ala. reversed
Beebe v. Russell 283 (1857) Wayne none none C.C.D. Ark. dismissed for want of jurisdiction
Farrelly v. Woodfolk 288 (1857) Wayne none none C.C.E.D. Ark. dismissed for want of jurisdiction
Babcock v. Wyman 289 (1857) McLean none Catron, Campbell C.C.D. Mass. affirmed
Byers v. Surget 303 (1857) Daniel none none C.C.E.D. Ark. affirmed
Garrison v. Memphis Ins. Co. 312 (1857) Campbell none none C.C.D. Mo. affirmed
Commercial Mut. Marine Ins. v. Union Mut. Ins. 318 (1857) Curtis none none C.C.D. Mass. affirmed
Field v. Seabury I 323 (1857) Wayne none none C.C.D. Cal. reversed
Field v. Seabury II 333 (1857) Wayne none none C.C.D. Cal. reversed
Bryan v. Forsyth 334 (1857) Catron none McLean C.C.N.D. Ill. reversed
Ballance v. Papin 342 (1857) Catron none none C.C.N.D. Ill. reversed
United States v. Peralta 343 (1857) Grier none none S.D. Cal. affirmed
McCullough v. Roots 349 (1857) Campbell none none C.C.D. Md. affirmed
Walton v. Cotton 355 (1857) McLean none Curtis Tenn. reversed
Pratt v. Reed 359 (1857) Nelson none none C.C.N.D.N.Y. reversed
The Steam Boat Sultana 362 (1857) Nelson none none C.C.N.D.N.Y. affirmed
United States v. Sutherland 363 (1857) Grier none none S.D. Cal. affirmed
Fellows v. Blacksmith 366 (1857) Nelson none none Sup. Ct. N.Y. affirmed
Roberts v. Cooper 373 (1857) Wayne none none C.C.D. Mich. increasing appeal bond denied
McRea v. Bank of Alabama 376 (1857) Curtis none none C.C.E.D. Ark. affirmed
Michigan Cent. R.R. Co. v. Michigan S.R.R. Co. 378 (1857) Grier none none Mich. dismissed for want of jurisdiction
Ballard v. Thomas 382 (1857) Nelson none none C.C.D. Md. affirmed
Platt v. Jerome 384 (1856) Nelson none none C.C.S.D.N.Y. restoration of appeal denied
United States v. City Bank 385 (1857) Daniel none none C.C.S.D. Ohio remanded to divided lower court
Burke v. Gaines 388 (1857) Taney none none Ark. dismissed for want of jurisdiction
Bulkley v. Honold 390 (1857) Curtis none none C.C.E.D. La. affirmed
Scott v. Sandford 393 (1857) Taney Wayne, Catron, Daniel, Grier, Campbell Curtis, McLean C.C.D. Mo. reversed

Notes and references

  1. ^ Lawson, Gary; Seidman, Guy (2001). "When Did the Constitution Become Law?". Notre Dame Law Review. 77: 1–37.
  • ^ Anne Ashmore, DATES OF SUPREME COURT DECISIONS AND ARGUMENTS, Library, Supreme Court of the United States, 26 December 2018.
  • ^ "Supreme Court Research Guide". Georgetown Law Library. Retrieved April 7, 2021.
  • ^ Parker, Garrett (2019). "Ranking the 10 Worst Supreme Court Decisions of All-Time". Money Inc. Retrieved June 10, 2021.
  • ^ Staff (October 14, 2015). "13 Worst Supreme Court Decisions of All Time". FindLaw. Retrieved June 10, 2021.
  • ^ Bernard Schwartz (1997). A Book of Legal Lists: The Best and Worst in American Law. Oxford University Press. p. 70.
  • ^ Junius P. Rodriguez (2007). Slavery in the United States: A Social, Political, and Historical Encyclopedia. ABC-CLIO. p. 1. ISBN 9781851095445.
  • ^ David Konig; et al. (2010). The Dred Scott Case: Historical and Contemporary Perspectives on Race and Law. Ohio University Press. p. 213. ISBN 9780821419120.
  • External links


    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_United_States_Supreme_Court_cases,_volume_60&oldid=1055662265"

    Categories: 
    Lists of United States Supreme Court cases by volume
    1856 in United States case law
    1857 in United States case law
    Hidden categories: 
    Pages using gadget WikiMiniAtlas
    Use American English from September 2020
    All Wikipedia articles written in American English
    Use mdy dates from March 2021
    Infobox mapframe without OSM relation ID on Wikidata
    Coordinates on Wikidata
    Pages using the Kartographer extension
     



    This page was last edited on 17 November 2021, at 03:26 (UTC).

    This version of the page has been revised. Besides normal editing, the reason for revision may have been that this version contains factual inaccuracies, vandalism, or material not compatible with the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License.



    Privacy policy

    About Wikipedia

    Disclaimers

    Contact Wikipedia

    Code of Conduct

    Developers

    Statistics

    Cookie statement

    Mobile view



    Wikimedia Foundation
    Powered by MediaWiki