ipl-logo

Dred Scott V. John F. A. Sandford Case Summary

961 Words4 Pages

In 1857 the Supreme Court overruled a previous decision by the circuit court of St. Louis County, Missouri. The Case of Dred Scott versus John F. A. Sandford would go down in history as one of the courts most erroneous rulings. This verdict called into question a slaves rights in free states, popular sovereignty and the legality of the Missouri Compromise. Dred Scott had won a previous court battle over his former master John Sandford claiming that he had assaulted his wife and children and that he should in fact be a free man because he had been moved to Illinois and Wisconsin for a time. Since both were free territories he should in fact be free. Chief Justice Roger B. Taney wrote the opinion on the case, stating that because he was a black …show more content…

Emerson, a surgeon in the army. He stayed in Illinois as Dr. Emerson’s slave until 1836. They continued on to Fort Snelling in Upper Louisiana until 1938. Dr. Emerson gave permission for Dred to marry his wife Harriet in 1836at Fort Snelling. The Doctor then moved Dred, Harriet and their daughter to Missouri in 1838. After moving to Missouri, the Scott’s (Dred, Harriet, Eliza and Lizzie) were sold to John Sandford. Dred brought his case to court in 1846 with the claim that his previous movements with his old master made him a free man. The claim was upheld in the circuit court but reversed in the states supreme court. Dred brought another accusation that John Sandford, his new master, assaulted his family. Sandford argued against the assault charges claiming that as they were his property he was free to lay his hands upon them. The jury this time found for Sandford. Dred took further action by filing a bill of exceptions against the proceedings, this bill led to the Supreme Court …show more content…

“It is not the province of the court to decide upon the justice or injustice” (Taney, 385). Above the main entrance to the Supreme Court building are the words “Equal Justice Under Law”, does this not mean justice for everyone? Apparently this court did not think that everyone included African-Americans. They duty of the court is, to interpret the instrument they have framed…(Taney, 386). I agree this is the duty of the court but is their interpretation limited to the words on paper or is it a wider scope that envelopes not only the words but the intent of our forefathers. Society is ever changing and many of our founders were aware of this flux. America is built on the escape of religious freedom and politics (changing societies). I think the Taney and his court did not in fact interpret the framed instrument but manipulated the readings to their own mindset. Taney then does go into interpretation of the founders intent This court decided that the writers of the Constitution were upstanding gentlemen that would have seen the white race as superior and slaves and their families were being taken care of ty their masters. A slave could nor should ever be considered a citizen under their ruling. Congressional policy that prohibited slavery in certain territories was in violation of the Fifth Amendment since slaves were

Show More
Related
561 Words | 3 Pages

Roger Brooke Taney made history in the 1857 Dred Scott Case by ruling that black slaves were not citizens of the United States. This controversial historical figure died on October 12, 1864, in Washington, D.C. One of Robert’s most famous quotes was "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. "What Robert is saying is that a master of a slave can do whatever he/she wants with that slave. By the time Roger B Taney became Chief Justice, Taney had become a staunch supporter of slavery, even though he had manumitted eleven slaves he inherited as a young man and made anti-slavery statements when serving as defense

Read More
394 Words | 2 Pages

The Missouri Supreme Court was ready to hear the case on April 3rd 1848, judge William Scott issued a unanimous decision on June 30th 1848 that “no final judgment upon which a writ of error can only lie”. The case was still just a suit for freedom. On March 17th 1848 Mrs. Emerson had the sheriff of St. Louis County take charge of the Scotts. He hired them out and maintained the wages until the trial was over; they were under his custody until March 1857.

Read More
237 Words | 1 Pages

Dred Scott, slave of army surgeon John Emerson, had travelled with Emerson from Missouri to several states including Minnesota. The Missouri Compromise declared Minnesota a free state. After returning to Missouri, Scot sued for his freedom based on the grounds that he had previously lived in a free state. When the case reached the supreme court, the court ruled that living in a free state for a period of time did not make Scott a free man, that the Missouri compromise was unconstitutional because Congress did not have the right to prohibit slavery in any territory as that violated the 5th amendment, and finally that as a black man, Scott was excluded from citizenship and could not bring suit Abraham Lincoln was Republican candidate in the

Read More
774 Words | 4 Pages

In the Dred Scott v. Sandford case in 1957, a black man named Dred Scott who at the time was living in Illinois and previously in free territory of Wisconsin before moving back to the slave state of Missouri, had gone against the government and appealed to the Supreme Court hoping he would get the grant of freedom. Scott attempted to sue the the Missouri courts for his freedom, but ultimately failed in the end. He was claiming that his residence in a freed territory made him a free man, but the courts resided. Eventually, Scott brought this case to the Supreme Court which caused a big dispute between the people in America about the

Read More
567 Words | 3 Pages

Scott then proceeded to sue John Emerson and his estate. The estates were represented under John Sanford. Upon the closing of this case the court ruled in favor of Mr. Sanford, because they believed that during this time slaves were not considered to be a citizen of the United States. Dred Scott even stated in his complaint that the fifth amendment can also serve as his defense because it protected citizen against the people abusing their power.

Read More
692 Words | 3 Pages

By the 1850s the Constitution, originally framed as an instrument of national unity, had become a source of sectional discord and tension and ultimately contributed to the failure of the union it had created as can be seen by, Compromise of 1850, the Fugitive Slave Acts of 1850, and the Kansas-Nebraska Act, and the Dred Scott Decision. During the Compromise of 1850, the Northern states had prohibited slave trade and California was admitted as a free state. However, the Southern states permitted slave holding and had no slavery restrictions in Utah or New Mexico territories. The Fugitive Slave Acts of 1850 said that all runaway slaves have to be returned to their masters, however, the problem with this is people would go to free states and

Read More
962 Words | 4 Pages

Dred Scott was a Virginia slave who tried to sue for his freedom in court. The case eventually rose to the level of the Supreme Court, where the justices found that, as a slave, Dred Scott was a piece of property that had none of the legal rights or recognitions afforded to a human being. The Dred Scott Decision was an event that happened that effected the start of the Civil War. It threatened to entirely recast the political landscape that had thus far managed to prevent civil war. The classification of slaves as mere property made the federal government’s authority to regulate the institution much more

Read More
1459 Words | 6 Pages

It is a historical inevitability leaded by many different factors. "Dred Scott Case" is one of the most controversial events in American history. Dred Scott was an African American black slave born in 1795. He was taken by his master John Emerson, an army surgeon in the United States of America, from the slave state of Missouri to the free state of Illinois and then to the free territory of Wisconsin. He lived there for a long period of time.

Read More
907 Words | 4 Pages

Because Taney was stating that Scott did not have citizenship due to his African heritage, he did not have a right to sue in a United States court of any kind. Therefore, the Circuit Court did not have jurisdiction over this case (Pearson Education Inc. 2008). Taney took his ruling one step further and decided that since slaves were considered property, they were protected under the Fifth Amendment. Property rights cannot be denied without due process (Independence Hall Association 2013). Taney argued that it was therefore unconstitutional for any state to make a law taking away another person's property, in this case their slaves.

Read More
792 Words | 4 Pages

Scott delivered his argument on the fact that Illinois and Wisconsin, his and his master’s former residency, made him a free individual. A state court ruled in Scott’s favor, but that Supreme Court of Missouri reversed that decision. At the same time, Scott became property of John Sanford in New York. Scott’s lawyers transferred the case to federal court because Sanford didn’t reside in Missouri.

Read More
756 Words | 4 Pages

Dred Scott was born was a slave in the state of Virginia and was owned by Peter Blow, who died in 1832. Scott only had two masters after Blow’s death; one lived in Wisconsin and later Illinois, both of which prohibited slavery, yet, Scott didn’t petition for freedom. Instead he met his wife Harriet. The two met their new master in Louisiana, who did not grant them freedom, so Scott looked for legal action to escape his slavery. Over a period of seven years, he went through trial and retrial until he was denied his final freedom in 1854.

Read More
566 Words | 3 Pages

Besides this, the Dred Scott Decision of 1857, was an unfair ruling against Dred Scott, a slave who should have been entitled to freedom. This injustice greatly enraged Northerners because to them, it was an evident victory of Southerners. Although

Read More
1820 Words | 8 Pages

The debate over slavery was not a new topic. Slavery was on the founding father’s minds when they wrote the Constitution, even though the word slave was never used in the document itself. Early on in the United States’

Read More
1809 Words | 8 Pages

Buchanan’s inaugural address stated that the extension of slavery into the territories was “a matter of but little importance.” Since the judiciary’s role was to judge the constitutionality of legislation and the problem at hand was what the proper role of the government should be in regard to slavery in the territories, only the Supreme Court could give an appropriate and fair ruling. Buchanan thus left the decision of slavery to the Supreme Court and declared that he ultimately supported its decision regardless of the outcome. This ruling allowed Buchanan to remain neutral - neither theoretically angering Northerners over the possibility of allowing slavery to be permitted in the territories nor Southerners over the possibility of banning it. However, Buchanan made a key mistake.

Read More
1821 Words | 8 Pages

Another prominent theory is the Scott v. Sandford court case. In this court case, a slave named Dred Scott sued his owner, Sandford, because they had lived Illinois, a free state, for around five years. For this reason, he believed he should have been a free man. The case was taken to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court ruled that Scott was not a U.S. citizen and should not be counted as a person but as property.

Read More

More about Dred Scott V. John F. A. Sandford Case Summary

Open Document