Of course they did. Much like Illegal Alien sanctuary cities do today.
There were other cases cases working their way up to the Court. Of particular note was Lemmon v. The People. The New York Court of Appeals held that all slaves -except fugitives- became free the moment they stepped into the state. In dissent it was noted the act would be a valid cause for war. Lemmon was noted as one South Carolinas reasons for secession.
"....slant of the website..."
What website?
How about some examples?
There were other cases cases working their way up to the Court.
Is there any reason to believe their fate at the hands of the Taney court would have been any different?
Of particular note was Lemmon v. The People. The New York Court of Appeals held that all slaves -except fugitives- became free the moment they stepped into the state. In dissent it was noted the act would be a valid cause for war. Lemmon was noted as one South Carolinas reasons for secession.
Where was it noted?
Of course the fugitive slave law required the federal government to return slaves if they were fugitives from ‘service’.
Nothing in the federal consititution required states to return slaves who were not fugitives. Judge Taney got around that by denying Dred Scott standing.
Of course if SC had a problem with the acts of NY, they had an obligation under Article III of the constitution to resolve the controversy by application to the supreme court, not by starting an insurrection or war.