*
*
Search:
*
Check regional listings
*
*
*
*
Explore through topicThe Court and also DemocracyLaw, strength & PersonalityThe first Hundred YearsCapitalism and Conflict broadening Civil RightsThe Future the the Court
*
*
*



You are watching: The dred scott decision on the issue of slavery upheld the southern viewpoint that

*
*
*
*
*

*
The Court"s decision in Dred Scott v. Sandford, holding the blacks could not be U.S. Citizens, exacerbated sectional tensions between North and also South.Above, a portrait of Dred Scott. Reproduction courtesy that the Library the Congress


See more: Why Did Emily Leave Make It Or Break It, Make It Or Break It Is Pre

Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857)
*
In Dred Scott v. Sandford (argued 1856 -- decided 1857), the supreme Court ruled that Americans of african descent, whether complimentary or slave, were no American citizens and also could not sue in federal court. The Court likewise ruled that Congress lacked strength to ban slavery in the U.S. Territories. Finally, the Court claimed that the legal rights of slaveowners were constitutionally safeguarded by the fifth Amendment because slaves to be categorized as property.The controversy started in 1833, when Dr. John Emerson, a surgeon v the U.S. Army, to buy Dred Scott, a slave, and eventually relocated Scott to a basic in the Wisconsin Territory. Enslavement was banned in the are pursuant come the Missouri Compromise. Scott live there for the next four years, rental himself the end for work throughout the long stretches when Emerson to be away. In 1840, Scott, his new wife, and their young children moved come Louisiana and also then to St. Louis with Emerson. Emerson died in 1843, leaving the Scott household to his wife, Eliza Irene Sanford. In 1846, after ~ laboring and saving because that years, the Scotts sought to buy their liberty from Sanford, but she refused. Dred Scott then sue Sanford in a state court, saying that he was legally complimentary because he and his family members had resided in a region where slavery was banned. In 1850, the state court finally claimed Scott free. However, Scott"s wages had actually been withheld pending the resolution of his case, and also during that time Mrs. Emerson remarried and left she brother, john Sanford, to attend to her affairs. Mr. Sanford, do not want to salary the earlier wages fan to Scott, appealed the decision come the Missouri supreme Court. The court i turned down the reduced court"s decision and also ruled in favor of Sanford. Scott climate filed one more lawsuit in a federal circuit court declare damages against Sanford"s brother, john F.A. Sanford, for Sanford"s alleged physics abuse versus him. The jury ruled that Scott can not sue in federal court because he had currently been deemed a slave under Missouri law. Scott appealed to the U.S. Can be fried Court, i m sorry reviewed the instance in 1856. As result of a clerical error at the time, Sanford"s name was misspelled in court records.The can be fried Court, in an notorious opinion written by cook Justice i get it B. Taney, ruled that it lacked jurisdiction to take Scott"s case due to the fact that Scott was, or in ~ least had been, a slave. First, the Court argued that they could not game Scott"s case because federal courts, consisting of the can be fried Court, space courts that "peculiar and minimal jurisdiction" and also may just hear cases brought by choose parties involving minimal claims. For example, under short article III of the U.S. Constitution, commonwealth courts might only listen cases brought by "citizens" the the joined States. The Court rule that due to the fact that Scott to be "a negro, whose ancestors to be imported into this country, and sold together slaves," and thus " a member the the political ar formed and also brought into existence by the Constitution," Scott was not a citizen and had no best to file a sue in commonwealth court. Second, the Court suggested that Scott"s condition as a citizen of a complimentary state did no necessarily offer him condition as a U.S. Citizen. If the claims were complimentary to create their very own citizenship criteria, and also had excellent so before the Constitution even came into being, the Constitution provides Congress exclusive government to define national citizenship. Moreover, the Court suggested that even if Scott was considered "free" under the regulations of a state, he would certainly still no qualify as an American citizen due to the fact that he to be black. The Court asserted that, in general, U.S. Citizen are only those who were members that the "political community" at the moment of the Constitution"s creation, along with those individuals" heirs, and also slaves to be not part of this community. Finally, the Court suggested that, in any case, Scott might not be characterized as totally free by virtue of his residency in the Wisconsin Territory, due to the fact that Congress lacked the power to ban enslavement in U.S. Territories. The Court perceived slaves as "property," and also the 5th Amendment forbids conference from taking property away from individuals without just compensation. Righteousness Benjamin Curtis authorize a solid dissent.The decision in Dred Scott v. Sandford exacerbated risisng sectional tensions in between the North and also South. Although the Missouri deteriorate had currently been repealed before the case, the decision nonetheless appeared to validate the southern version of national power, and also to embolden pro-slavery Southerners to broaden slavery to all reaches the the nation. Unsurprisingly, antislavery pressures were overcome by the decision, empowering the newly formed Republican Party and helping fuel violence in between slaveowners and also abolitionists on the frontier. Complying with the polite War, the repair Congress passed, and also the says ratified, the civicpride-kusatsu.netth, Fourteenth, and also Fifteenth Amendments, all of which directly overturned the Dred Scott decision. Today, all people born or nature in the United states are American citizens that may carry suit in federal court.
*
AUTHOR"S BIO
*
Alex McBride is a third year legislation student at Tulane law School in NewOrleans. He is posts editor ~ above the TULANE regulation REVIEW and the 2005recipient that the ray Forrester compensation in constitution Law. In 2007, Alexwill be clerking through Judge Susan Braden ~ above the United states Court ofFederal cases in Washington.
*
*