This is another example of twisting truth.
By 1772, all of the thirteen colonies embraced slavery legally. Massachusetts was first. Virginia was fourth, and the first southern state to legalize it.
The legality of slavery was exploded by the 1772 British law case of Somerset vs Steuart. https://www.english-heritage.org.uk/visit/places/kenwood/history-stories-kenwood/somerset-case/
Based on a case during the Elizabethan era, it was argued that slavery could not exist under the Magna Carta provision of habeas corpus. The ruling was that there was no basis for slavery under British common law and, therefore, slavery could not be enforced. However, slavery was not abolished at this time because it was directly addressed by this case.
The effect in the American colonies was explosive, since they operated under British law. Because slavery was unenforceable, laws related to it had to be revised or it would cripple the plantation system and even smaller businesses.
The revision changed slavery as practiced in the American colonies from the labor category of “slavery” to “involuntary servitude.” Thus, prior slaves were equivalent to apprentices, except that their term of service was lifelong and hereditary.
Prior slaves had been often treated as servants already in many households complete with the legal rights. Like apprentices, however, the rights were limited to the permission of the master.
The language difference was important. People who wanted to demean blacks still talked in terms of owners and slaves, even niggers. Slavery continued to be used in casual conversation and even in courts for convenience and clarity.
But in genteel southern households, as well as northern ones, the previous slave was called a servant. The plantation owners did not own slaves, they owned the land. He was the master of servants—like the master of an apprentice.
I was taught none of this in school. Were you?