Philosophy of Law

Other
2

Just started the third module this week. Seems like this week consists of reading a fairly long article summarizing the eight different ways judges approach interpreting the constitution. Stuff like textualism, pragmatism, etc. Outside of that, I just have to read the SCOTUS opinion on Dred Scott and Brown.

For now I just watched two YouTube videos related to the cases to get an idea about them (I was vaguely familiar with the cases but its been a while since I did anything with them):

  • Dred Scott v. Sandford

    • The Dred Scott Decision: Crash Course Black American History #16
      • Dred Scott born around 19th century in VA.
      • Bought/originally enslaved by Peter Blow
        • Bought by John Emerson and moved Scott from the slave state of Missouri to the free state of Illinois and then to Wisconsin
          • In Wisconsin, Scott married his wife and started a family.
            • In 1840 Emerson’s wife returned to Missouri to be with her family and brought the Scotts with her.
              • 1843 Emerson dies. Wife doesn’t let the Scotts buy out their freedom from her.
                • 1846 Scott files suit for his freedom
                  • 1850 Scott won his case. He had good arguments under Missouri precedent. Missouri appealed.
      • Stuff happened and now we’re at the Supreme Court
        • Scott lost 7 - 2
        • Scott did not have standing to sue, blacks are not citizens including freed ones in the north
      • Missouri Compromise - designated part of the Louisiana Purchase as part slave territory, part free territory
      • Scott v. Sandford set a cultural precedent where people felt they had to prove they were white enough to deserve benefits.

  • Brown v. Board of Education

    • Brown v. Board of Education, EXPLAINED [AP Gov Review, Required Supreme Court Cases]
      • Brown is actually a bunch of consolidated cases related to segregation in schools (which happened, in part, due to a previous case called Plessy v. Ferguson).
      • This case started (so I assume the original “Brown”) with a family trying to get their daughter into a much closer white school, instead of the further black school.
      • Browns lawyer argued that all these cases of segregation were a violation of the 14th amendment.
        • Separation itself was unequal. It also did stuff like instill inferiority in the minds of black kids.
      • Decision: 9-0
        • Agrees with the feelings of inferiority argument.
      • “Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal.”