Question

a free negro of the african race, whose ancestors were brought to this country and sold as slaves, is not a \citizen\ within the meaning of the constitution of the united states. when the constitution was adopted, they were not regarded in any of the states as members of the community which constituted the state, and were not numbered among its \people or citizens.\ consequently, the special rights and immunities guaranteed to citizens do not apply to them. and not being \citizens\ within the meaning of the constitution, they are not entitled to sue in that character in a court of the united states, and the circuit court has not jurisdiction in such a suit. - dred scott v. sandford, supreme court of the united states the supreme court concluded that, because african americans were not citizens when the constitution was adopted, they could not be considered citizens in this case. what type of fallacy does this piece of evidence represent? ad populum genetic fallacy begging the claim hasty generalization

Explanation:

• Ad populum: This fallacy is about appealing to popular opinion. The text is not about what the majority thinks.
• Genetic fallacy: It focuses on the origin. Here, the argument is based on the status at the time of the Constitution's adoption (origin - not citizens then), so it fits.
• Begging the claim: It assumes the conclusion in the premise. This text is not just circular in that way.
• Hasty generalization: It's about making a broad claim from a small sample. This is not the case here.

Answer:

genetic fallacy