ipl-logo

Dred Scott Vs Sanford Case Study

455 Words2 Pages

The two parties in this case are Dred Scott and John Sanford. Scott, a former slave bought by Dr. John Emerson, argued that when him and the Emerson family moved to Illinois, which was a free state, that he became a free man and no longer could be held as a slave to the Emerson family when they moved to the slave state of Missouri. Sanford, Mrs. Emerson’s brother, argued that since he went to Missouri with Mrs. Emerson, and that it was legal in Missouri to hold slaves, that he was still considered to be Mrs. Emerson’s property. Once Dr. Emerson died, Scott and his family sued Mrs. Emerson for false imprisonment, but Mrs. Emerson won the case in a Missouri Circuit court when Scott’s lawyers were unable to prove that Emerson was holding him as a slave. Scott’s lawyers argued for a retrial and it went to the Missouri Supreme Court. The trial ended with two of the three judges ruling in favor of Mrs. Emerson and John Sanford. This ruling overruled a previous precedent which was that the court usually ruled in favor of the slave when they had been moved from a free state to a slave state. This precedent was overruled because they ruled in the owner’s favor instead of the slave’s. …show more content…

His goal by doing this was to officially earn his and his family’s freedom and leave the Emerson family. Scott’s lawyers argued that by moving him to a free state and by becoming a free man there, that he would always be a free man now. Scott had reason to believe that he would win the case because similar cases had gone through the Supreme Court before and they had ruled in the slave, or former slave’s

Show More
Related
1028 Words | 5 Pages

Dred Scott, a slave who frequently moved from the pro-slavery Missouri and antino-slavery Illinois, offered to buy his freedom after his master died. However, the master’s wife refused, which as a result, Scott sued her. Scott’s suit originated from the basis of how because that he had lived in a non-slave state, he was no longer a slave.. Through a long process of 11 years, his case eventually reached the Supreme Court in Scott vs. Sandford. The Chief Justice of this caseourt was Roger B. Taney.

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
647 Words | 3 Pages

Scott and his wife file for separate petitions with the court as their petitions are dismissed and their lawyer files for a new trial. Irene then hands over the Scott’s to the St. Louis County Sheriff to be their sole custody as slaves, while the case that Scott had previously filed with the court was being resolved. The court case had a ruling and the Scotts’ were freed from slavery. Mrs. Emerson was not pleased with the court’s ruling and she and her brother appealed the ruling with the Missouri Supreme court and a new trial was started and named – Dred Scott v. Irene Emerson. The Missouri supreme Court decides to reverse their own ruling and Scott and his family are no longer free but slaves again living in a free

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
367 Words | 2 Pages

This one particular case Dred Scott vs Sanford. It is about Dred Scott being born in Virginia, and was a slave. His owner moved to Alabama, and took him with him, then sold him to a guy that moved with Dred Scott to Illinois witch was a slave free state but he wasn 't free,so he fought for it. The slave may have won if they hadn 't made the Missouri compromise,witch ruled against him. Junius P. Rodriguez says it is

Read More
1614 Words | 7 Pages

Within the United States supreme court, seven out of the nine judges either supported slavery or had owned slaves previously, so Dred Scott was entering a biased and unfair trial to begin with. On March 6, 1857, The decision for the Dred Scott v. Sanford case was heard by Chief Justice Roger B. Taney, who stated that slaves were not citizens of the United States, and "... They had no rights which the white man was bound to respect". ( Cite Source) He also explained how Scott was never free when he lived in the free territories and that congress was prohibited to have any ruling over slavery, which made the Missouri Compromise unconstitutional .

Read More
776 Words | 4 Pages

During the early-to-mid 1800s, the North and South had begun to seriously argue on the issue of slavery. While the South were in favor of keeping slavery, the North could not wait to be rid of it. The decision of the Dred Scott case would be known as an important event which would spark the friction between the North and South to rise drastically. Dred Scott, an African American slave, sued for his freedom because he had lived in a free state for most of his time in the United States. In the ruling at Supreme Court, Chief Justice Taney had ruled that because he was an African American slave, Dred Scott could not sue for the reason that Scott was not a citizen and that he was property.

Read More
871 Words | 4 Pages

Dred Scott was a slave who tried to sue his owner because he said since he lived in a free state he was a free man. The north went on to back up the dred scott by using the missouri compromise and that in the constitution the writers meant “we the people” as everybody including slaves, so that gives them the rights of a citizen. The south had many arguments one being the missouri compromise was unconstitutional and congress couldn’t tell states if they could be free or slave and what the can do with their property. Lastly slaves or former slaves for that matter had no rights of a citizen. In document H the fugitive slave act of 1850 it talks about how slave owners have the right to claim their slaves if they escape no matter where they escape to.

Read More
1826 Words | 8 Pages

The personal factor affects the decision of Chief Justice Roger B. Taney. A. The place where he from held the inherent idea about slaves. Tenny think Scott free will is the Fifth Amendment of serious violation, because this is in lack of the premise of the due process of law under the personal property of deprivation. Congress has no power to prohibit slavery, and to the grounds of violation of the constitution, should be designed to limit the expansion of slavery in 1820,

Read More
424 Words | 2 Pages

Around 1850, slavery was a serious issue in the United States which led to many controversies between States in the country. Moreover, several Supreme Court Cases decisions affect the United States during this time. After the Dred Scoot decision, due to the unconstitutionally of the Missouri Compromise, western states were in risk of becoming slave states, such as Kansas. In Kansas a series of violent conflicts occurred between free-slavers and slave-starters. For instance, the Dred Scott decision was the cause of the Bleeding Kansas, however, Kansas became a bloody place.

Read More
731 Words | 3 Pages

The state attracted citizens from both the North and the South, causing the disagreements of the opposing sides to become more evident. By the year 1855, issues emerged when proslavery and antislavery settlers were competing in order to outnumber one another in votes. Two years later, divisions between the North and South grew even stronger when the Supreme Court took on the case of Dred Scott. Scott, who was an African American slave, sued for his freedom after his masters had traveled with him to a free state. The Court, ruled by Chief Justice Roger B. Taney, came to the conclusion that Scott was not a free man because he was property and it would be unconstitutional to take the property of a citizen.

Read More
716 Words | 3 Pages

In 1846, Scott sued his and his family’s freedom, but was rejected by the Supreme Court 11 years later. The final ruling had an immense impact politically, economically and socially. (Bell. “Civil War on the Western Border”). Chief Justice Roger B. Taney wrote an opinion against Scott, which makes logical sense since he is a southerner.

Read More
593 Words | 3 Pages

Where Scott, a slave black man, argued that he should be free because his owner had taken him and died in a free-state. That he should not have to go back to his owner’s wife as property, because he was in a state where he should be a free man. The decision written by Chief Justice Roger B. Taney in two parts. The first part stated that Scott was not a citizen and that he no legal ground to file a lawsuit, and the second part stated that free states laws were unconstitutional based on the 5th amendment’s right of property. This ruling elevated the tensions between the

Read More
1166 Words | 5 Pages

The Dred Scott decision came about when Dred Scott, an enslaved African American man, claimed that because he was living in a free territory, he should be a free man. The case went to the Supreme Court where judge Taney made several rulings that included: African Americans, because they weren’t official U.S. citizens, didn’t have the right to sue in a federal court, that living on free soil didn’t make a slave free, that the Missouri Compromise wasn’t constitutional, and that Congress couldn’t ban slavery in any federal territory. While debates and decisions did have a huge impact on the political side of slavery, they weren’t the only things for so many things caused slavery to become as “important” as it

Read More
537 Words | 3 Pages

Dred Scott was sued for his freedom on the grounds that he had lived for a time in a "free" territory. The Court ruled against him, saying that under the Constitution, he was his master 's property. The people involved with this court case are the Supreme Court,Dred Scott, and Chief Justice Roger B. The final judgment for this case ended up in Dred Scott 's favor.

Read More

More about Dred Scott Vs Sanford Case Study

Related Topics

Open Document