This is part of Amicus and Slate’s “By the People” series, which explores how the American people can reclaim the Constitution—and the law—from this monarchical Supreme Court.

As Amicus delved into popular constitutionalism—the process by which ordinary people shape constitutional meaning—we came across Lyle Cherneff’s work on a largely forgotten American story that captures the concept in action. Writing in the Yale Law Journal, Cherneff reconstructed the history of In re Turner, an 1867 decision by Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase that helped end the re-enslavement of Black children through involuntary “apprenticeships.” At the center of the case was Elizabeth Turner, an 8-year-old girl whose mother fought to free her after her former enslaver forced her back into bondage. She was one of many Black parents whose demands for their children’s freedom helped define the scope of the 13th Amendment’s ban on slavery after the Civil War.

In the latest episode of By the People, our summer series on popular constitutionalism, co-hosts Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern explore the importance of In re Turner and its striking relevance amid this year’s immigration raids in Minnesota. The episode draws on Amicus’ interview with Cherneff, a lawyer and visiting assistant professor at the University of Minnesota Law School. The following excerpt has been edited and condensed for clarity.

Mark Joseph Stern: Elizabeth Turner was 8 years old when she was indentured just two days after she and her mother ostensibly gained their freedom. Her enslaver, Philemon T. Hambleton—who may well have been her biological father—refused to release her from servitude.

Dahlia Lithwick: Meanwhile, Elizabeth’s mother traveled across the Chesapeake Bay to Baltimore and made her way to the Freedmen’s Bureau, a federal agency established during Reconstruction that provided food, medical care, education, and legal assistance to emancipated African Americans. Lawyers from the bureau filed a habeas corpus petition on young Turner’s behalf. They were busy.

Lyle Cherneff: Maryland historian Richard Paul Fugate estimates that between 3,000 and 4,000 children, in the first weeks after emancipation alone, were re-enslaved through these fraudulent indenture contracts. It varied somewhat by county, but in almost every case, the person “apprenticing” the child was in fact the former slaveholder.

Lithwick: Separated from their children, not yet full citizens, formerly enslaved parents faced unimaginable odds to reunite their families. But here is where something extraordinary happens: A movement begins, both legally and corporeally. People physically show up, demanding that their rights be vindicated.

Cherneff: Almost immediately after emancipation in Maryland, there were reports of parents........

© Slate