Question

read the passage from the opinion of the court in dred scott v. sandford, written by justice taney. the question before us is, whether the class of persons described in the plea in abatement compose a portion of this people, and are constituent members of this sovereignty? we think they are not, and that they are not included, and were not intended to be included, under the word citizens in the constitution, and can therefore claim none of the rights and privileges which that instrument provides for and secures to citizens of the united states. what type of fallacy does this argument represent? hasty generalization ad populum begging the claim genetic fallacy

Explanation:

The court assumes what it should prove, that the group isn't part of "the people" or "citizens". This is begging the claim.

Answer:

begging the claim