Have you ever heard about the slave sued his owner’s widow for his freedom? Well, the decision in Dred Scott v. Sanford is considered to be one of the most influential in legal history because the Supreme Court decided that the slaves are not defined as citizens of the United States, thus influencing their ability to sue in federal courts and this case eventually raised questions about slavery which led to the civil war. Dred Scott was a man who was once an African-American slave. He was sold in Missouri as a slave to an army surgeon, Dr. John Emerson, they later moved and lived in free states; Illinois and Wisconsin. Then, they moved back to Missouri, which is a slave state, but John Emerson passed away in 1846, so it is time he should become free. John Emerson's widow
…show more content…
That is Sandford’s argument. Slavery was questioned during that period of time, certainly, that debate was popular at that time. The final decision was that Supreme Court favored Sandford. Despite a hot debate, 7 out of 9 justices, including Chief Justice Roger Taney, disagreed with Scott. Dred Scott was going to lose hard, despite that it was not a hot debate. This was a pro-slavery decision. They ruled that blacks cannot be citizens of the United States. Since that the laborers is a property: they cannot be citizens so they cannot sue in federal courts.
Future president, Abraham Lincoln shared his opinion of the case, "What Dred Scott's master might lawfully do with Dred Scott, in the free state of Illinois, every other master may lawfully do with any other one, or 1,000 slaves, in Illinois, or in any other free state." This was when he gave his “House Divided” speech. Meaning that it doesn’t only made a difference in Dred Scott’s life, it also applies to among the others who are like Dred
That is Sandford’s argument. Slavery was questioned during that period of time, certainly, that debate was popular at that time. The final decision was that Supreme Court favored Sandford. Despite a hot debate, 7 out of 9 justices, including Chief Justice Roger Taney, disagreed with Scott. Dred Scott was going to lose hard, despite that it was not a hot debate. This was a pro-slavery decision. They ruled that blacks cannot be citizens of the United States. Since that the laborers is a property: they cannot be citizens so they cannot sue in federal courts.
Future president, Abraham Lincoln shared his opinion of the case, "What Dred Scott's master might lawfully do with Dred Scott, in the free state of Illinois, every other master may lawfully do with any other one, or 1,000 slaves, in Illinois, or in any other free state." This was when he gave his “House Divided” speech. Meaning that it doesn’t only made a difference in Dred Scott’s life, it also applies to among the others who are like Dred