ipl-logo

The Dred Scott Decisions That Led To The Civil War

573 Words3 Pages

Many things led to the Civil war. One being slavery. The debate over the future of slavery had brought many trails and with the help of other disputes soon led to war. The Northern and Western states where fighting to purify the union. While the South fought to gain independence under its own constitution.The Northern and Southern states had disagreed upon many things between slavery. Even though they had felt the same fear in abolitionist . Thinking of the word and pay that would decrease by freeing the people. Jobs would soon become limited, because the simple fact that slave workers or now African Americans frre would work longer hours for less pay.The south said that the slaves were necessary for the development of the culture. So while the Southern and Northern states had their disagreements they also had the same point of view with certain things. The north feared that the abolitionist …show more content…

It was one of the main over turns to the Missouri Compromise of 1820. Dred Scott was a slave who wanted citizenship and yet,turned to the American legal system to find it. That also turned over to the Supreme Court.The Supreme Court then died his request stating that no African American blood people could become citizens.Dred Scott Compromise did not go as well planned as he had expected at that time but,things latter let to a more severe case. The Missouri Compromise. States Rights, one of the other reasons that led to Civil War.It was mostly the struggle between the federal government and individual states over political power.This was looked at mainly toward the fact of abolishingf slavery within its own state.They had dissagreements on if the abolishing of slavery was the right decision.And if the federal government had the right to make a final decison on the slave trade category. They argued that the state should only be allowed certain rights. And that the supreme court should make the final

Show More
Related
470 Words | 2 Pages

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.

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
538 Words | 3 Pages

In conclusion, the Dred Scott v. Sandford decision was one the most infamous in Supreme Court history. Dred Scott a slave who sued for his freedom on the base that residence on free soil had made him free lost the case. He lost in what is now known as one of the worst decisions in Supreme Court history. The court ruled that people of African descent cannot be, nor were ever intended to be, citizens. Therefore the court held that it did not have jurisdiction because Scott was not a

Read More
601 Words | 3 Pages

It also ruled that the federal government didn 't have the power to regulate slavery. After the Dred Scott vs Sandford case, outrage flourished in anti-slavery northerners and an uproar swept through the south. Anti-slavery abolitionists were outraged because the Supreme Court ruled that all African Americans may not become citizens. The turmoil in the south was caused by the somewhat pro-slavery ruling in the Dred Scott vs Sandford decision. According to Shmoop, the popularity for the anti-slavery Republican party surged.

Read More
67 Words | 1 Pages

However, in the 18th and 19th centuries there was a great deal of arguing and talk about freeing slaves between the Northern and Southern states, which the North really did not have a problem with freeing the slaves since they were leaning more toward the liberating lifestyle for all American people. The South was in between abolishing slavery. There were stereotyping going around the states about slaves.

Read More
792 Words | 4 Pages

The issue of slavery became a hot topic in the South mainly because it offended the North’s sense of morality. The decision was a product of the governing system. The courts are not given the ability to write laws but only can interpret laws passed by the US Congress. The main issue was that the court could only interpret what was framed as a problem regarding slaves as property and not citizens.

Read More
542 Words | 3 Pages

The Dred Scott Decision was important since it changed the way African-Americans were viewed, and caused the Civil War since it caused Southern states to expand slavery. The Dred Scott Decision was significant to American history. The Dred Scott Decision was a crucial event for the entire United States. This significant choice started in 1846, and came to a close in 1857.

Read More
524 Words | 3 Pages

The North relied upon industrial growth and believed in free labor for the expansion in the West. Whereas, the South’s survival was based upon agriculture, more prominently cotton. Thus, the risk of slavery being abolished by the Federal Government would be detrimental to their way of

Read More
444 Words | 2 Pages

Due to the importance of slavery to its economy, the south held very different ideals than the north. For instance, during the Civil War, the North's Emancipation

Read More
1527 Words | 7 Pages

This decision was made eleven years after the initial trail began. The decision was concluded that slaves were not citizens of the United States and therefore had no right to sue in Federal courts. This was only the second time in history that the Supreme Court ruled the Act of Congress to be unconstitutional in the decision of Dred Scott. After the trial, Republicans went crazy to form anti-slavery in the North and it caused uproar throughout the slave and the abolitionist communities in the United States. It would not be until the 1960’s until the blacks finally get the rights they had been longing for since the beginning of this racial contest.

Read More
103 Words | 1 Pages

In 1847 Dred Scott sued his slave owners widow for his freedom. Scott’s argument was that since he had previously been a residence of the free state of Illinois he was a free man. Scott eventually lost the case when, in 1857, it was brought to the Supreme Court who ruled in a 7-2 majority against Scott. The court stated that due to the fact that Scott was of African descent he could not be an American citizen, and therefore not sue in federal courts. The court also ruled that the Missouri compromise was unconstitutional, effectively allowing slavery in all states and territories.

Read More
772 Words | 4 Pages

As the nation expanded westward, the decision of whether new territories would be slave or free states became very argumentative which reflected the economic interests of both Northern industrialists and Southern plantation owners. These economic conflicts increased the separation between the North and the South which ultimately led to the outbreak of the Civil War. Next, politically, the United States faced tensions that were driven by a series of events that deepened the divide between the North and the South. The Missouri Compromise of 1820 tried to address the issue of slavery in new territories in the United States with the exception of Missouri. While reducing tensions for the moment, this compromise postponed the unavoidable conflict over slavery’s expansion.

Read More
874 Words | 4 Pages

Northerners were fighting for the equality of slaves, because they knew right from wrong. The north very badly wanted to “avert” from the war, but there was no going around what was happening, and everybody knew

Read More
200 Words | 1 Pages

The Civil War was started in many different places. The Civil War started because of uncompromising disagreements between the free states and the slave states. The people who

Read More
1159 Words | 5 Pages

There were three main causes of the civil war including slavery, sectionalism and secession. Slavery was a huge part of it and it led to the Missouri Compromise where any states below the border would be slave states and the anything north of that was free states. (Mrs. Wise) "The south feared the declaration of freedom for the slaves by government leaders in the North." Next, sectionalism. Sectionalism-

Read More

More about The Dred Scott Decisions That Led To The Civil War

Open Document