The Constitution's "Fugitive Slave" Clause

Slavery predates the establishment of the United States, tracing back to 1619 with the arrival of "twenty and odd" Africans in Jamestown. While these individuals were not initially enslaved, slavery would become a pivotal institution in American history over the ensuing decades and centuries.

By 1787, when a convention gathered to revise the Articles of Confederation, the slave trade was in full force. Enslaved persons powered Southern life and their status led to massive debates within the Constitutional Convention. These debates led to compromises like the Three-Fifths compromise, which, for apportionment, counted every three out of five enslaved persons.

Article IV, Section 2, Clause 3 of the new U.S. Constitution was another compromise. Pierce Butler and Charles Pinckney of South Carolina offered this clause during the Constitutional Convention without mentioning the word "slave."

The "fugitive slave clause" remained in full effect until the abolition of slavery under the Thirteenth Amendment made it unenforceable.

Understanding the Fugitive Slave Clause

Article IV, Section 2, Clause 3 reads as follows:

"No Person held to Service or Labour in one State, under the Laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in Consequence of any Law or Regulation therein, be discharged from such Service or Labour, but shall be delivered up on Claim of the Party to whom such Service or Labour may be due."

Although this clause does not mention the word "slave," it nevertheless formed the basis for the Fugitive Slave Act of 1793, giving slaveholders the right to capture enslaved persons who ran away.

Article IV, Section 2, Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution, the extradition clause, provided a means for enforcing this Act. The extradition clause regulates interstate extraditions.

Chattel Slavery

Under chattel slavery, enslaved people were the property of their enslavers, much like a car or a house. Most enslavers had title to their property and could make claims on "escaped slaves."

By the late 19th century, the United States of America was pretty divided between free states and slave states. Most Northern states (free states) did not allow slavery; most Southern states could not survive without the practice.

Fugitive Slave Laws and Interstate Conflicts

Given the proximity of "free" states to many Southern states, conflict often occurred whenever an enslaved person escaped to freedom in a free state. In theory, the enslaved person's status changed when they entered a state that prohibited slavery. Prigg v. Pennsylvania provides a strong illustration.

Prigg v. Pennsylvania

In the 1840s, Pennsylvania, a "free state," had two laws to protect its free Black population. These laws prohibited taking a Black person out of Pennsylvania and into slavery. In Prigg, Margaret Morgan, an enslaved Black woman, moved north from Maryland, a slave state, to Pennsylvania. Although Morgan's enslaver had technically freed her, he never made it official. His heirs hired Edward Prigg to recover their property. Prigg kidnapped Morgan and her children, returning them to Maryland. Prigg was ultimately convicted of violating Pennsylvania's laws.

Prigg appealed to the Supreme Court, which found in his favor under the Supremacy doctrine. Under this doctrine, Pennsylvania's laws contradicted the Constitution of the United States and the federal government's Fugitive Slave Act of 1793.

Post-Prigg Landscape

Eight years later, as part of the Compromise of 1850, Congress passed the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850. This Act gave the federal government a role in capturing fugitive enslaved persons and required escaped slaves in any state—slaveholding or not—to be returned to slaveholders.

The Thirteenth Amendment, which abolished involuntary servitude, rendered the Fugitive Slave Clause obsolete.