this is karen hunter and welcome to in class with car this is a space where during the pandemic

we imagined what it would look like to teach a class online that would be for the world and it

started with a simple question can i press record it was a question that i asked of the people's professor

dr gray car At the time,

he was the head of Africana Studies at Howard University. He's still teaching the world. And in this

space, we have been going strong since 2020. And it has been amazing. So tune in to In Class

with Carr. And thank you for joining us. You can follow us by the way at

Narrative with a K. Join us Narrative with a K. The K is silent like knowledge. K

N-A-R-R-A-T-I-V-E narrative.com. If you want to have a deeper relationship with us,

join us there. Stay tuned.

General, you said in your reply brief that the children of slaves who were brought

here unlawfully, you know, in defiance of laws forbidding the slave trade, would in fact

be citizens.

Yes.

And we can imagine that their parents were not only brought here in violation of United States law,

but were here against their will, and so maybe felt allegiance to the countries where they were from.

And you say that the purpose of the 14th Amendment was to put all slaves on equal footing, newly freed slaves on equal footing,

and so they would be citizens. But that's not textual. So how do you get there? You say it in just a few sentences, so can you elaborate? Sure. If you look at the 19th century sources, what you see is that even though their entry may have been unlawful, 19th century antebellum law never treated their presence as unlawful. In fact, quite the opposite. One of the Amici in fact points like a Mississippi statute, which probably is replicated throughout the South, before the Civil War, that says slaves in Mississippi have an indefeasible domicile in Mississippi. In other words, even if they run away, if they get away, Mississippi says, nope, you still live here, And so it would be astonishing, in other words, for the opponents of the 14th Amendment to say, oh, you know, these people are not domiciled and therefore it goes the other way, because actually U.S. law, even if they were brought in illegally and, you know, through an illegal slave trade, once they were there by their intent is to return as soon as they can, let's say. So they're here, they're resident and maybe under your theory, I mean, which says, well, lawfulness for a different purpose. But they're here, they're resident, let's take your assumption that they're not here unlawfully. But let's say they don't have an intent to stay. They want to escape and go back the second they can. Are they domino's low? under the 19th century law, I mean, I think this is the flip side of the hypothetical

that we talked about earlier.

Under 19th century law, they are treated as domiciled in the United States, so it would

be astonishing.

And in the debates in the Congressional Four talk about not this specific case, but they

...