Dubya Gets It Wrong - Again

Many folks were a bit confused when Dubya referenced the infamous Dred Scott decision as an example of "judicial activism" during the second presidential debate. As Slate's Timothy Noah explains, Dred Scott is code in the pro-life crowd for Roe v. Wade, so when Dubya hammers on Dred Scott, he's really taking aim at Roe. Aside from the code-talk, Dubya is, of course, wrong in his assessment of Dred Scott. Chief Justice Taney did not pull the holding of Dred Scott out of his ass - the Constitution is a document that, at the time, enshrined and protected the institution of slavery and the de-humanization of black people. Dred Scott is not so repugnant because it was a legal outlier, but because it was the logical end-point of the Constitution before the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments.