Taney himself was anti-slavery. He had made the choice to free the slaves he had inherited before taking his seat on the Supreme Court. As a Supreme Court Justice, however, he was supposed to make judgments based on the Constitution and laws of the United States. There are two main approaches to interpreting the Constitution. Strict Constructionalism focuses on the meaning of the Constitution as it was intended by those who wrote it. Loose Constructionalism reads the Constitution as if it were a contemporary document, applying current beliefs to the interpretation. Based on the selection, do you believe that Taney allowed his personal opinions to bias him, or whether he used either a Strict or Loose Constructionalism interpretation of the Constitution. Explain why you think as you do, quoting from the primary source to support your opinion. PLS HELP ME!!! :)