2012/11/01 by H. Robert Baker · 8 citations
Business, Management and Accounting · Social Sciences · #American Constitutional Law and Politics #American History and Culture #Constitution #Constitutional law #Epistemology #Federalism #Interpretation (philosophy) #Judicial interpretation #Law #Legislature #Linguistics #Meaning (existential) #Originalism #Philosophy #Political science #Politics #Race, History, and American Society #Sociology #State (computer science) #Subject (documents)
paper · doi:10.1017/s0738248012000697
published in Law and History Review 30(4), 1133-1174 (Cambridge University Press)
openalex publication_date 2012/11/01 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/05/21
Among the most long-lasting constitutional controversies in the antebellum era was the interpretation of the fugitive slave clause. It was the subject of repeated legislative and judicial construction at both the state and the federal level. It raised delicate questions about federalism and the balancing of property rights and personal liberty. Slaveholders and abolitionists brought irreconcilable constitutional positions to the table, ultimately dividing Northerners from Southerners. However, it was not just divergent political commitments that made it difficult to fix a stable meaning to the fugitive slave clause. The text itself was ambiguous enough to make it amenable to multiple interpretations. For precisely this reason, an examination of the changing interpretations of the fugitive slave clause uncovers antebellum constitutional praxis, allowing us to see how historical actors interpreted the Constitution and how those interpretations shifted over time.