I think I've just found the worst SC decision ever

[minionofmidas]

United States vs Joseph, 1876

in which the SC ruled that the Pueblo Indians of New Mexico, being Christian (which is not quite true actually, but never mind), agricultural (as were most inhabitants of the present-day US in precontact times, but again never mind), and just in general hardworking, decent, settled, sober folk, though racially undoubtedly Indians were clearly not Indians and therefore the US government had no right to treat with them under the Indian Commerce clause or pass any special legislation to protect them whatsoever.

It was overturned in United States vs Sandoval, 1913. Although the 1913 judges rubbished the previous logic, just to make sure they also cited instances in their decision in an attempt to prove that Pueblos were drunken, slothful and uncultured too.

[Yates]

This is one of the worse decisions I have seen.

[Speed of Sound]

*bangs head on keyboard multiple times, passes out*

[memphis]

The recent New London decision is still worse.

[MaC]

Kelo v New London is the worst modern case, worst of the Rehnquist court.

I don't see how this would be any worse than Dred Scott.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

There's no shortage of sh**tty SCOTUS cases, Bush v. Gore being the worst in a long time.

[Chiahead]

That's what you get when you have the supreme court attempt to interpret something.   

[Verily]

This is one of the worse decisions I have seen.

Up there with the recent Kelo v New London.

[Jacobtm]

Buck V. Bell was quite worse I think; in it, the Supreme Court affirmed the right of the state to preform eugenic sterilization.

[DownWithTheLeft]

Umm.., you must obviously be unfamiliar w/Roe v. Wade if you are calling something else a worse decision