A dissent by Justice Swayne denied the authority of the court to "interpolate a limitation," while the majority opinion claimed that a piece of legislation passed five years earlier had only "one pervading purpose."
A dissent by Justice Swayne denied the authority of the court to "interpolate a limitation," while the majority opinion claimed that a piece of legislation passed five years earlier had only "one pervading purpose." Former Justice John Campbell argued for a broad interpretation of the amendment on which this case hinged, and a central distinction was between state and federal citizenship. Justice Field acknowledged the validity of the legislation but dissented from the majority opinion by Samuel Miller, since incorporation of the Crescent City Company was not necessary to achieve the purpose. Holding that the Fourteenth Amendment was limited to protecting blacks, FTP, identify this group of cases brought by a butchers' association.
A dissent by Justice Swayne denied the authority of the court to "interpolate a limitation," while the majority opinion claimed that a piece of legislation passed five years earlier had only "one pervading purpose."
Slaughterhouse Cases (accept The Butcher's Benevolent Association of New Orleans v. The Crescent City Live-Stock Landing and Slaughterhouse Company)