"United States v. Susan B. Anthony: Justice Ward Hunt's Court Ruling:" How does the case of Bradwell v. State described in Paragraph 4 add to the development of Justice
Hunt's ruling?
"The case of Bradwell v. State decided at the recent term of the supreme court,
sustains both of the positions above put forth, viz., first, that the rights referred to in
the fourteenth amendment are those belonging to a person as a citizen of the United
States and not as a citizen of a state; and second, that a right of the character here
involved is not one connected with citizenship of the United States. Mrs. Bradwell
made application to be admitted to practice as an attorney and counsellor at law in
the courts of Illinois. Her application was denied, and, upon a writ of error, it was
held by the supreme court, that, to give jurisdiction under the fourteenth
amendment, the claim must be of a right pertaining to citizenship of the United
States, and that the claim made by her did not come within that class of cases.
Justices Bradley, Swayne, and Field held that a woman was not entitled to a license
to practice law. It does not appear that the other judges passed upon that question.
The fourteenth amendment gives no right to a woman to vote, and the voting by
Miss Anthony was in violation of law."
a)
The Supreme Court denied women the right to practice law and thus they
cannot vote either.
b)
The decision on who gets to practice law is similarly up to a particular state
and was not changed by the fourteenth amendment.
c)
The case demonstrates that Anthony would not be allowed to vote in Illinois
as well.
d)
Justice Hunt is addressing Anthony's choice to be represented in court by a
woman as not helping her case.