Yik Yak logo
Download TikTok Instagram X
Yik Yak icon
Join communities on Yik Yak Download
US Politics icon
US Politics 4d
This is the exact argument they used in Dred Scott v Sandford to deny black people their rights. That cased denied black people their rights based on arbitrary “citizenship” status and now you’re making the same argument
US Politics icon
US Politics 4d
Only citizens have the right to vote. That’s just common sense
comment

3
upvote 14 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous 3d

This is actually asinine. By your logic, I should be able to vote in every election in the country—state or federal—simply because citizenship is “arbitrary.” But even putting that aside, it’s not the same argument made in Dred Scott. The Court held that Scott had no standing to sue as he wasn’t a citizen on the basis of his race. Ironically, that ruling was actually arbitrary because the Constitution doesn’t proscribe race as a determinant of citizenship. Voting is something else entirely…

upvote 7 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous 4d

To be fair, there’s a difference between not having the right to vote and being legally classified as property, but I think your point although poorly contrived still stands

upvote 0 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #1 4d

Dred Scott v Sandford did not rule that he was property. The case simply ruled that because he was not a citizen he did not have the right to sue for his freedom even though legally he should have had it even by the laws of the time

upvote 4 downvote