Remind me why Dredd Scott was decided wrong.
Dred Scott was decided 7 to 9
Pretty solid case that what was not in the Constitution ( at the time) could not be added from bench over emotion
Led to the proper relief...Constitutional Amendment (s)
I'm not a lawyer and so I cannot say that it was "decided wrong". I do think most people consider Dred Scott to have been a low point for the Court, which probably increased the likelihood of civil war.
From Wikipedia:
Taney concluded that the Court had no jurisdiction over Dred Scott's case because he was not a citizen. However, after deciding this issue, Taney did not conclude the matter before the Court, as per usual procedure, but rather continued further and struck down the Missouri Compromise as unconstitutional. Taney wrote that the Compromise's legal provisions would free slaves who were living north of the 36°N latitude line in the western territories. However, in the Court's judgment, this would constitute the government depriving slaveowners of their property—since slaves were legally the property of their owners—without due process of law, which is forbidden under the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Taney also reasoned that the Constitution and the Bill of Rights implicitly precluded any possibility of constitutional rights for black African slaves and their descendants.
In Flynn's case, there is no prosecutor. In Scott's case, the Supreme Court declared that it did not have jurisdiction. Yet in both cases, the judge wants to issue a decision nonetheless.
Taney also declared that blacks could NOT be citizens per the Constitution. I think that's a big stretch.
Lastly, Taney overturned the Missouri Compromise -- which may have been appropriate (I'm not a lawyer) -- but I don't think that matter was before the court. And the basis seems questionable to me because the Fifth Amendment is partially about not allowing the government to "take" things from property owners and the Missouri Compromise did not involve the government "taking" anything. It just set rules for what type of property could be owned. Seems different to me.
My two cents.