The Dred Scott Decision made the Civil War unavoidable because of the treatment of African Americans regarding their equality and opportunity. Dred Scott was a slave in Virginia who tried to sue for his freedom in court. The case eventually went to the Supreme Court level, where the justices found that, as a slave, Dred Scott was property that had none of the legal rights of that of a white man. The Northerners hated this decision because it meant that slavery could spread into all territories. This inflamed tensions as the Northerners felt that the South was trying to expand slavery into the free states and would be able to do so. “It allowed, virtually unchecked, the spread of slavery into territories and states, threatening the economic …show more content…
The Missouri Compromise focused on creating a balance between free and slave states. So, this was where Missouri was admitted as a slave state, and Maine was admitted as a slave state. The Missouri Compromise led to the Civil War because the country was split between half wanting slavery and half not. The problem with this is that it was only a compromise and was not long term. “Nevertheless, the act helped hold the Union together for more than thirty years” (History.com, 1) Though there is evidence to support both sides, I believe the Dred Scott Decision made the Civil War more unavoidable than the Missouri Compromise was. The Missouri Compromise was the very start of the segregation between the North and South, while the Dred Scott Decision made it visible that this issue needed to end and wouldn’t just disappear. The Dred Scott Decision showed that the North and South wouldn’t be able to keep making compromises and needed a final long-term end. Overall, the decision about Dred Scott caused the segregation between the North and South to greaten, and led to the Civil