Social and Behavioral Sciences Commons^™

Table Annexed To Article: “The Idea Of Freedom Might Be Too Great A Temptation For Them To Resist,”, Peter Aschenbrenner

Peter J. Aschenbrenner

In Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. 393 (1857), the Supreme Court passed up a chance to thread George Washington’s experience in transporting household staff across state lines; Washington obeyed Pennsylvania’s predicate: that a human being held to slavery in one state became free after six months in Pennsylvania. Since the features of this species of mobilia varied with the jurisdiction, the Supreme Court should have taken this landscape into account. George Washington did not import, with his household workers, ‘rules and understandings’ from Virginia.

“The Idea Of Freedom Might Be Too Great A Temptation For Them To Resist", Peter J. Aschenbrenner

Peter J. Aschenbrenner

Table Annexed To Article: Taney’S Complaint: This Country’S Too Darn Big For Moveables, Peter J. Aschenbrenner

Peter J. Aschenbrenner

Taney’s Dred Scott decision complains that Dred Scott’s freedom’s a federal taking of private property without compensation, a Fifth Amendment violation. How should mobilia be governed, given the nearly four dozen law-making jurisdictions, which, of 1857, are in the business of regulating attributes of mobilia; that is, assigning predicates to objects? A schema for tracking the claims teased out of Taney’s opinion is proposed. Can predicates in motion be made permanent?