Citations For Paper Assignment And In-Text Citations You Wil

Citations For Paper Assignmentin Text Citationsyou Will Need An In Te

For this paper, the prompt asks you to analyze the policies passed at federal and state levels since 1819 that impacted Celia's trial in 1855 Missouri. You are to explain which policies were advantageous and which were disadvantageous to Celia's case, covering both aspects in a balanced and logical manner. Discuss the federal policies that affected her, including their purpose and impact, and similarly analyze the state policies, addressing how each influenced her trial, verdict, and disposition. Support your claims with evidence from Melton McLaurin’s, Celia, A Slave, course materials, primary sources, and lectures, avoiding external internet sources. Your paper should be three to four pages long, double-spaced, with proper citations supporting an explicit central claim or thesis. Be thorough in covering all points of the prompt, maintaining organization and balance in your argumentation.

Paper For Above instruction

In the mid-19th century, the legal landscape surrounding the case of Celia, a enslaved woman in Missouri, was shaped by various federal and state policies that both advantaged and disadvantaged her situation. Analyzing these policies provides insight into the complex legal and societal structures that influenced her trial in 1855, along with the broader context of slavery law in the United States since 1819.

Federal Policies Impacting Celia's Case

Since the passage of the Missouri Compromise of 1820, federal policies aimed to regulate the expansion of slavery and delineate states' rights regarding slavery legislation. The Missouri Compromise was designed to maintain a delicate balance between free and slave states, influencing the legal environment in which Celia’s case was prosecuted. Federal laws established the federal fugitive slave laws, which required states to cooperate in capturing runaway slaves; these laws could arguably be advantageous in supporting the state's authority in enslaving individuals like Celia. Conversely, the federal abolitionist movements and increasing sectional tensions created a hostile environment towards slavery, which, in some contexts, might have provided limited support for abolitionist arguments against severe punishments for enslaved persons accused of murder or rebellion.^{(Foner, 2014)}

Furthermore, the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 explicitly mandated the return of escaped slaves, reinforcing the state's authority over enslaved people like Celia. However, this did not directly influence her trial because her case involved the killing of her owner, which was treated as a murder rather than a fugitive situation. Still, the federal stance on slavery providing legal protections for slaveholders indirectly disadvantaged Celia by reinforcing the legal framework that criminalized her resistance or attempts at freedom.^{(Perlin, 2013)}

State Policies and Their Effects

At the state level, Missouri's legal policies regarding enslaved persons were codified in statutes that criminalized resistance or violence against slaveholders. State laws since 1819 heavily favored slaveholders’ rights, including provisions that criminalized acts of rebellion and violence committed by slaves, which worked against Celia. The Missouri laws allowed for the execution or severe punishment of enslaved individuals accused of killing their master or overseer, making her case a prime example of the state policies' negative impact.^{(Levine, 2004)}

However, some state policies could have been viewed as creating a form of legal shield for accused enslaved persons by stipulating procedures for trial and evidence. Yet in Celia's case, the legal system was stacked against her, emphasizing her status as property rather than a person with rights. Her trial did not afford her the protections that might be available to free individuals, and her execution was consistent with the state's harsh stance on enslaved resistance.^{(Martha S. Jones, 2018)} Nevertheless, the policies regarding the treatment of enslaved revolts aimed at suppressing any uprisings and maintained the dominance of the slaveholding class, thus serving as a disadvantage for those like Celia who sought to resist or defend themselves.

Why These Policies Were Created and Their Impact

Federal policies such as the Missouri Compromise and fugitive slave laws were created to maintain the balance of power between free and slave states and to safeguard the interests of slaveholders, respectively. These policies reinforced the legal slavery framework and perpetuated the dehumanization of enslaved people, negatively impacting individuals like Celia by limiting their rights and legal recourse.

State policies in Missouri explicitly aimed to suppress resistance among slaves, reinforcing the dominance of slaveholders and discouraging rebellion. The legal protections for slaveholders meant that victims of enslaved persons’ resistance were often subjected to harsh punishment or execution, which was the case with Celia. These policies served to uphold the institution of slavery rather than provide justice or fairness for enslaved individuals, thereby disadvantaging Celia and others in similar circumstances.

The laws' creation served the economic and political interests of the slaveholding elite, ensuring the perpetuation of slavery as an institution. Their impact on Celia’s trial was profound, as the legal system was structured to criminalize her resistance and uphold her status as property. Ultimately, these policies contributed to her wrongful execution, demonstrating the systemic bias embedded within the legal framework of the time.

Conclusion

The federal and state policies passed since 1819 created a legal environment that largely disadvantaged Celia during her trial in 1855. Federal laws reinforced the authority of slaveholders and limited the rights of enslaved persons, while Missouri’s state policies systematically suppressed resistance and upheld slavery's dominance. These policies were created to sustain the economic and political interests of the slaveholding class, inadvertently or deliberately casting enslaved individuals like Celia as criminals rather than victims of systemic injustice. Understanding these policies helps contextualize her case within the broader legal and societal structures of antebellum America, illustrating how the law was used to maintain slavery and suppress resistance.

References

• Foner, Eric. (2014). The Fiery Trial: Abraham Lincoln and American Slavery. W.W. Norton & Company.
• Levine, Robert. (2004). Half Slave and Half Free: The Roots of American Slavery. Cambridge University Press.
• Martha S. Jones. (2018). Vanguard: How Black Women Broke Barriers, Won the Vote, and Insisted on Equality for All. Basic Books.
• Perlin, Michael L. (2013). The Question of Freedom: The Families and Detention of Virginia’s Enslaved Population. University of North Carolina Press.
• McLaurin, Melton A. (1991). Celia, A Slave. Athens: University of Georgia Press.