Is not justice blind? Should there be emotions in the judicial system? Does Mr Shurtleff hope to win our votes by tugging on our heartstrings?

If a cause is just it can stand on its own merits. Clinging to the shirttails of someone else is a pitiful and inexcusable play on emotions. Mr. Shurtleff had better decide whether he wants to be a historical novelist or whether he wants to serve the people. His attempt to win us to his cause via Mr. Dred Scott is degrading, both to Mr. Scott and to himself. A public servant had better be able to stand on his own feet and defend the Constitution without calling from the grave the help from those who have passed through life.

Chief Justice Taney did an amazing job of laying out and explaining clearly the issues of citizenship. Persons who were brought here to America for the purpose of slavery can never be in the original class of citizens of this country with inalienable rights. The Dred Scot decision is still the law of the land. It was never overturned although future Constitutional Amendments XIII and XIV were Congress' way around the holding of the Court.

It is too bad that many Americans don't care enough about their citizenship to read and understand exactly what the Courts have said about it. It is truly an important issue to understand as it directly relates to the rights and prerogatives of most of of us.

I would hope that we could abolish the 14th Amendment and enact changes to the constitution to extend and recognize inalienable rights for those freed black slaves and their posterity and others similarly situated. I think it is time to do away with having two classes of citizenship. It just is not right.