Lincoln actively challenged the expansion of slavery because he believed the United States would stay true to the Declaration of Independence. His objections to the practice were based on practical and moral reasons. He believed that the exercise was a monstrous injustice, as it denied enslaved individuals their fundamental rights and liberties. Slave ownership put the United States in a precarious position, given that it seemed insincere in its insistence on universal freedom. It is worth considering the fact that Lincoln was not the only advocate for the abolition of slavery. For instance, Senator William Seward criticized the Taney court’s justices as individuals that were determined to ensure slavery spread throughout the United States (Simon, 2007). Despite facing significant opposition, Lincoln persisted and demonstrated an astute understanding of justice and natural laws in his efforts to end slavery.
Justice
Lincoln’s insistence on the necessity of freedom was essential to his philosophy on justice. His views and beliefs were the results of reading and experience. Abraham Lincoln opposed slavery in all its forms on Kantian-like grounds (Rockler, 2007). He echoed the categorical imperative when he highlighted the fact that one would never support the enslavement of others, seeing as it was unappealing to be bound in servitude (Rockler, 2007). Using enslaved human beings as a means to achieve specific objectives is a violation of the categorical imperative. Lincoln did not believe that a nation founded on democratic beliefs should tolerate practices that encourage the enslavement of others.
Lincoln also condemned slavery on utilitarian grounds given that the risks of the practice far outweighed the benefits. Lincoln believed that immutable principles of justice must be observed and that people could discern them from the laws of nature (Guelzo, 2010). Lincoln believed that slavery was founded on bad policy and injustice. The President argued that the injustice in the ownership of another human being was so plain that it seldom needed explaining. In addition, the fact that Black men joined the Union military to fight for the United States means that there was an implicit contract between them and the government to secure their freedom. Lincoln argued that the African American community acted on motives like all other Americans. Therefore, he questioned why they expected to serve the nation’s interests while their own were ignored.
Evidently, the President based his decisions on elements that he considered fundamental. Abolitionists faulted Lincoln on numerous occasions for moving too slowly toward achieving emancipation. They viewed his hesitation as a refusal to address the oppressed people’s needs. It is vital to note that Lincoln frequently enunciated his beliefs and refused to compromise them for the sake of temporary political expediency. Lincoln consistently applied his principles in matters regarding public policy. Lincoln’s term as President was characterized by the transformation of America’s ethos in distinct ways. For instance, the late President actively subverted the Constitution by purposely interpreting the Declaration of Independence as a moral covenant. Lincoln also prioritized equality as the nation’s main idea and emphasized that the Declaration’s definition of equality applied to individuals.
Lincoln’s views highlight the fact that slavery was a violation of a person’s natural right to labor as well as the goods produced by the endeavor. The President categorized the ownership of other human beings as morally unjust and worked towards the perfection of America’s natural rights principles. It is vital to point out that Lincoln’s perspective on natural law was influenced in part by his evangelical Protestant roots, which played a pivotal role in crafting his personality. Lincoln did not support the view that hired forms of labor, such as slavery, were fixed conditions for life. The natural law perspective informed Lincoln’s duties as commander in chief as he enforced policies in key areas to promote the people’s natural rights. Firstly, Lincoln defended the Union as was necessitated by the rules governing the maintenance of civil liberties. Secondly, the President prioritized the emancipation of enslaved people to gain victory in the war. Lincoln also championed the reconstruction of the Union by prohibiting slavery and offering equal rights and citizenship to all formerly enslaved people. It is clear from Lincoln’s actions that the natural law tradition was present in American constitutionalism.
Even though Lincoln found human bondage distasteful, he did not vilify the South for its preoccupation with the practice. Abraham Lincoln always stayed within the bounds of the law as he insisted that enslaved individuals were members of humanity and deserved an equal opportunity to succeed. The President was a firm believer in the idea that every individual who worked deserved to eat. Lincoln argued that the framers of the Constitution tolerated the ownership of enslaved people where it existed but did not intend for the practice to spread to other parts of the United States (Simon, 2007). The President presented the Northwest Ordinance of 1787, which criminalized slavery west and north of the Ohio river, to support the argument for abolition (Simon, 2007). Lincoln often used the ordinance to emphasize that the framers of the Constitution valued freedom above self-government (Simon, 2007). Lincoln’s interpretation of the Declaration of Independence served to emphasize his beliefs.
The Declaration of Independence
The Declaration of Independence was a revolutionary document that most people agreed justified separation from the hostile and indifferent parent nation. It addressed the new nation’s immediate needs and announced to the world that the United States was willing and able to engage in business. The government was “ordained and established in the people’s name (Maggs & Smith, 2020, p. 141). This was the view that most of the leaders who opposed Lincoln’s anti-slavery efforts believed. Lincoln ascribed to the idea that the framers of the Declaration were not intent on emphasizing that all people at the time enjoyed inalienable rights to life when they declared that all men were equal. The President believed that the aforementioned position was to be viewed as a promise that free people made to themselves and all others who desired freedom. The Declaration of Independence is, perhaps, the most important public document that relies on natural law as a premise (Stoner, 2021). Lincoln emphasized the transformative power that was contained within abstract ideas.
Lincoln often referred to the Declaration of Independence in his fight against slavery. The President was keen to highlight elements that spoke of justice and equality. The quest for independence prompted Congress in 1776 to appeal to the British constitutions and the opinions of mankind based on the laws of nature (Stoner, 2021). Natural law played a critical role in formulating the Declaration of independence. Firstly, it facilitated the explication of America’s independence from the perspective of the law of nations (Stoner, 2021). Secondly, it helped to ground the theory of God-given rights in the context of a man-made government that was poised for a revolution (Stoner, 2021). Lincoln stood against the political view which claimed that the Declaration of Independence was created by advocates who were intent on addressing immediate political and practical needs.
Lincoln found the idea that the document was solely the result of frantic efforts to separate from the mother country absurd. The President believed that the document asserted an abstract truth, emphasizing the equality of all created men. Lincoln believed that the Declaration of Independence was a defense against the rise of tyranny in the United States. It demonstrated the nation’s prioritization of liberty for all its people within its borders. It reflected simple human sympathy and a sense of justice that dissuaded the Caucasian majority from denying others access to the fruit of their hard labor through inhumane exploitation.
Lincoln did not support the view that territorial voters should be allowed to engage in the practice. The President attacked senator Douglas’s argument that, at its core, posited that black males were not men. Lincoln stated that Douglas’s argument was flawed because it was based on a false premise. Douglas opined that the idea of equal creation reflected that British subjects living in America were no different from those in Great Britain. The troubling issue with such an interpretation was that it effectively excluded all individuals in the United States who did not descend from colonists.
The Supreme Court
America’s legislative bodies played a critical role in the quest to end slavery in the nation’s Territories. Lincoln argued that the judicial department’s decisions on Constitutional matters have a bearing on individual cases and the country’s general policies (Lincoln, 1875). Lincoln believed that judicial decisions served to determine cases and indicate to the public how such cases are to be determined in the future (Lincoln, 1857). The Marshal Court laid the foundation for the Supreme Court’s powerful position on the progress and development of constitutional law (Cushman, 2012). Taney led The Supreme Court in its decision to avoid the difficult question of the federal government’s authority to exclude slavery in a territory or state (Simon, 2007). The Court’s cautious approach to the issue angered abolitionists, who were determined to see enslaved people achieve their freedom.
The Court made several decisions, some of which impeded progress toward achieving abolition. For instance, Lincoln noted that the Dred Scott decision highlighted that a negro was barred from suing in American courts, and Congress was incapable of prohibiting slavery within the Territories (Lincoln, 1875). Lincoln noted in his first inaugural address that the Supreme Court’s policies must fix vital government issues that affect ordinary people (Lincoln, 1861). The president also pointed out that the Dred Scott decision was erroneous and needed to be overruled (Lincoln, 1857). Evidently, the decision violated the rights of individuals condemned to a life of servitude.
Conclusion
The overt opposition that Lincoln faced did not deter him from applying the principles of justice and natural law in his quest to end slavery. Even though Abraham Lincoln did not advocate for absolute equality, he was conscious that enslaved people’s rights were being violated in the United States. The former President advocated for the equality of opportunity and the right of every individual to use their talents to take advantage of available opportunities. Lincoln was firmly convinced that there was no moral justification for the propagation of slavery in America’s free states. It was a huge step towards combating racial inequality and intolerance, but there are still many steps and decisions to be taken.
References
Cushman, C. (2012). The Supreme Court Justices: Illustrated biographies, 1789–2012. Sage Publications.
Guelzo, A. C. (2010). Lincoln and justice for all. First Things. Web.
Lincoln, A. (1861). First inaugural address. The Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History. Web.
Lincoln, A. (1857). Speech on the Dred Scott decision. Teaching American History. Web.
Maggs, G. E. & Smith, J. P. (2020). Constitutional law: A contemporary approach. West Academic.
Rockler, M. (2007). Presidential decision-making: Utilitarianism vs duty ethics. Philosophy Now, 64, 18–19. Web.
Simon, J. F. (2007). Lincoln and Chief Justice Taney: Slavery, secession, and the President’s war powers. Simon and Schuster.
Stoner, J. (2021). Natural law and the Declaration of Independence. Public Discourse. Web.