Display Mode
Dark
Dark
Light
Light
Theme Cover
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Search History
No search history
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Media
Term
Opinion Writer
Direction
Field

Marshall v. Knott

1867 • 131 U.S. ccv • Chase Court
Marshall v. Knott was a United States Supreme Court case that was decided in 1867. The case involved a dispute between two parties over the ownership of a slave named Marshall. Marshall had been owned by a man named Knott, who had died without leaving a will. Marshall's mother, who had been owned by Knott's father, had been freed by Knott's father before his death. Marshall argued that he was entitled to his freedom because his mother had been freed. The Supreme Court disagreed, ruling that...Open Case
Score:
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms
1 results found
Become a Sponsor
Support Us
Feedback: We can do better!

Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Chief Chase Court
Term: 1867
Docket: 209
131 U.S. ccv
76 L. Ed. 1344
1868 U.S. LEXIS 1063

Marshall v. Knott

  • Pro
  • Pro
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

Marshall v. Knott was a United States Supreme Court case that was decided in 1867. The case involved a dispute between two parties over the ownership of a slave named Marshall. Marshall had been owned by a man named Knott, who had died without leaving a will. Marshall's mother, who had been owned by Knott's father, had been freed by Knott's father before his death. Marshall argued that he was entitled to his freedom because his mother had been freed. The Supreme Court disagreed, ruling that Marshall was still a slave and that Knott's father had not intended to free Marshall when he freed his mother. The Court held that the freedom of Marshall's mother did not extend to Marshall, and that Marshall was still a slave and subject to the laws of slavery. The Court also held that Knott's father had not intended to free Marshall when he freed his mother, and that Marshall was still a slave and subject to the laws of slavery. The decision in Marshall v. Knott was a major victory for the slave-owning class, as it established that the freedom of a slave's mother did not extend to the slave himself.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the case of Marshall v. Knott, Chief Justice Chase delivered a dissenting opinion on behalf of himself and two other justices. He argued that the majority had erred in their decision by not recognizing that Congress has exclusive power to regulate interstate commerce, including navigation between states. The Court should have deferred to Congress’s authority rather than attempting to decide whether or not a particular vessel was engaged in interstate commerce. Furthermore, he noted that even if it were determined that the vessel was engaged in such activity, this would still be subject to Congressional regulation as opposed to state law enforcement officers who lack jurisdiction over matters involving interstate trade. Finally, he concluded by stating his belief that any attempt by state authorities to interfere with vessels navigating between states is unconstitutional and must be prevented from occurring again in order for federal supremacy over these matters remain intact.

Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
AI Assist
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcripts
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Ask Etalia.ai
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Audio of Oral Arguments
Free Trial!
Become a Sponsor

Support Us
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms