Is the Constitution “Pro-Slavery?”

Source: Tenth Amendment Center
by Brion McClanahan

“Nikole Hannah-Jones and other 1619 acolytes have been consistently pushing the idea that the Constitution was a ‘pro-slavery’ document. This comports to 19th century abolitionist rhetoric led by William Lloyd Garrison. To Garrison and his followers, the Constitution was not only a pro-slavery document, it was a pact with the devil. You know who didn’t believe this? About 99% of the American public. The 1619 stooges are advancing a position that most Americans (the vast majority) rejected throughout American history…. The Constitution was neither proslavery nor anti-slavery. It was neutral. It allowed slavery as long as the States maintained slavery.” [editor’s note: Contra McClanahan’s ham-handed revisionism, the initial ban on regulating slave importation, the fugitive slave clause, and giving slave states extra representation for their “property” on a “3/5ths of a person” basis make it clear that the Constitution was pro-slavery, not “neutral” – TLK] (07/13/21)

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2021/07/clearviews-face-surveillance-still-has-no-first-amendment-defense