Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T08:52:01.983Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Response to Lawrence Baum's review of Dred Scott and the Problem of Constitutional Evil

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 May 2007

Mark Graber
Affiliation:
University of Maryland

Extract

I am grateful to Professor Baum for his very generous review of Dred Scott and the Problem of Constitutional Evil. I am also grateful that Baum in his review and his response to mine highlights the normative significance of his research on judicial audiences. Dred Scott v. Sanford may have been wrongly decided, Baum suggests, because antislavery justices, not being able to predict the actual impact of their decision, should simply have freed Dred Scott as a matter of simple justice. In fact, all five southern justices in Dred Scott v. Sanford did simple justice by their light. More important, however, Baum is now self-consciously exploring central questions of American constitutionalism.

Type
CRITICAL DIALOGUE
Copyright
© 2007 American Political Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)