Question

“dred scott v. sandford”
by chief justice taney
mr. chief justice taney delivered the opinion of the court.
there are two leading questions presented by the record

1. had the circuit court of the united states jurisdiction to hear and determine the case between these parties?
2. if it had jurisdiction, is the judgment it has given erroneous or not?

the plaintiff in error, who was also the plaintiff in the court below, was, with his wife and children, held as slaves by the defendant, in the state of missouri; and he brought this action in the circuit court of the united states for that district, to assert the title of himself and his family to freedom.
the defendant pleaded in abatement to the jurisdiction of the court.
what fallacy can you identify and discredit to develop a counterclaim to this claim?
the idea that african american people are inferior based on perceptions from an earlier time
the idea that noncitizens cannot claim certain rights and privileges in the constitution

Explanation:

1. For the claim "the idea that African American people are inferior based on perceptions from an earlier time": This is a historical appeal fallacy (appeal to tradition) and a hasty generalization, relying on outdated, biased societal views rather than factual, universal principles of equality. It discredits itself by prioritizing past prejudice over inherent human rights.
2. For the claim "the idea that noncitizens cannot claim certain rights and privileges in the Constitution": This is a false dilemma/overgeneralization fallacy. The Constitution protects some fundamental rights (e.g., due process under the 5th and 14th Amendments) for all people within U.S. jurisdiction, not just citizens. The claim incorrectly assumes a complete lack of rights for noncitizens.

Answer:

1. For "African American inferiority claim": Appeal to tradition/hasty generalization; relies on outdated, biased 19th-century perceptions instead of universal equality principles, which are not a valid basis for denying rights.
2. For "noncitizen rights claim": False overgeneralization; the Constitution guarantees fundamental rights like due process to all people in U.S. territory, not only citizens, so this claim is factually incorrect.