View the H-SHEAR Discussion Logs by month
View the Prior Message in H-SHEAR's November 2005 logs by: [date] [author] [thread]
View the Next Message in H-SHEAR's November 2005 logs by: [date] [author] [thread]
Visit the H-SHEAR home page.
Date: Fri, 04 Nov 2005 14:44:49 -0600 (CST) From: firstname.lastname@example.org i have been at the SHA and only now have seen this. I am not sure how one responds. To think of the mid-19th century court abolishing slavery requires a leap of imagination suitable for Isaac Asimov or some other science fiction writer. > Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2005 11:16:01 -0500 > From: Kevin Gutzman <GutzmanK@wcsu.edu> > > Paul Finkelman's post about the impracticability of political > abolition of > slavery ignores the most common mode of constitutional > amendment: > appointing a Supreme Court majority willing to say that > properly > understood, the Constitution "really" means [fill in the > blank]. This > method of amendment, which has given us state legislative > reapportionment, > abortion rights, an end to segregation, etc., might eventually > have > brought an end to slavery. > > Prof. Kevin R. C. Gutzman > Department of History > Western Connecticut State University > Paul Finkelman Chapman Distinguished Professor of Law Univ. of Tulsa College of Law 2120 East 4th Place Tulsa OK 74104-3189 Phone: 918-631-3706 Fax: 918-631-2194 ----- End forwarded message -----