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

The Slavers. (Reindeer.

1864 • 69 U.S. 383 • Chase Court
The Slavers case was a landmark decision by the United States Supreme Court in 1864. The case involved two ships, the Reindeer and the Encomium, which were both owned by American citizens but had been seized for transporting slaves from Africa to Cuba. The court held that these vessels could not be considered as engaged in piracy or any other illegal activity under international law because they were being used for a legitimate trade purpose. Furthermore, it ruled that even if slavery was...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: 1864
69 U.S. 383
17 L. Ed. 911
1864 U.S. LEXIS 437
Argued: Feb 01, 1865

The Slavers. (Reindeer.

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

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

The Slavers case was a landmark decision by the United States Supreme Court in 1864. The case involved two ships, the Reindeer and the Encomium, which were both owned by American citizens but had been seized for transporting slaves from Africa to Cuba. The court held that these vessels could not be considered as engaged in piracy or any other illegal activity under international law because they were being used for a legitimate trade purpose. Furthermore, it ruled that even if slavery was prohibited by U.S. laws at home and abroad, this did not mean that all slave trading activities should be treated as criminal offenses under international law since some countries still allowed such practices at the time of seizure of these ships. This ruling established an important precedent regarding how international law applies to private property rights on high seas and set forth principles governing maritime commerce between nations during times of war or peace alike.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In Reindeer, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether slaves were property that could be taken in execution of a judgment. The majority opinion held that slaves were indeed property and could be taken in execution of a judgment. However, Justice Field dissented from this decision on the grounds that slavery is an institution which has been abolished by Congress and therefore cannot exist as a legal form of property. He argued further that since slavery had been abolished it would not make sense for courts to recognize it as valid or enforceable under any circumstances. Furthermore, he noted that allowing such seizures would violate the Thirteenth Amendment's prohibition against involuntary servitude and thus should not be allowed even if they are technically permissible under state law. Finally, he concluded by stating his belief that recognizing slave-ownership as valid or enforceable would undermine public policy goals related to emancipation and civil rights for African Americans.

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