ipl-logo

What Is The Basis Of The Dred Scott V. Sandford Case

1210 Words5 Pages

Before the inevitable beginnings of the American Civil War and states seceding from the Union, the country was plagued with the deciding whether to continue or disband the institution of slavery. Correspondingly, ongoing disputes where many believed their rights and beliefs had been violated on both sides of the quarrel caused seven Lower South to secede from the United States of America to form a new country called the Confederate States of America. However, there are four critical events leading to the American Civil War, specifically the changing political culture of the 1800s, tariffs, Missouri Compromise, and the Dred Scott v. Sandford Supreme Court case. Ultimately, the Dred Scott Supreme Court decision was the ultimate catalyst in making …show more content…

Sandford decision was also a considerable factor in the vents leading up to the Civil War. In fact, there is reason to believe the landmark decision of the case made the Civil War inevitable. The basis for the case revolved around Dred Scott and his owner taking him to “live for several years in Illinois, a free state,” where they would eventually return to Missouri, a slave state. Dred Scott sued for his freedom on the basis that due to his residence being in a free state, he would be considered a free man along with his wife. In a 7 to 2 ruling, the Supreme Court found that Dred Scott would still be a slave despite his owner taking him to a free territory. Additional rulings of the Supreme Court found the Missouri Compromise to be unconstitutional, and African Americans would never be able to be citizens of the United States. Most importantly, by citing the Missouri Compromise as being unconstitutional, it sent a message to all Americans, regardless of the slavery positioning, that Congress “had no power to ban slavery from any territory of the United States.” These comments and rulings by the court undermined other key concepts of democracy in America such as popular sovereignty, and “foreshadowed the spread of slavery throughout the West.” For northerners, this further confirmed their slave-powered conspiracies by demonstrating that even the government could not control or prevent the institution of slavery from further expanding into new …show more content…

The ruling had included “two northern justices [joining] the all five southern members,” to eventually equate to the 7 to 2 ruling of Dred Scott and his wife remaining a slave despite his owner taking him to a free state. By having two northern justices advocating for the Dred Scott to remain a slave alongside the decision to disband the Missouri Compromise caused northerners and abolitionist alike to fear for the future of the nation. Incidentally, it did not come as a surprise for most since the courts were dominated by pro-slavery individuals, but it further reinforced the ideology that slavery was here to

Show More
Related
788 Words | 4 Pages

Thus, the South desired their lifestyle to be left alone, and if refused, the Constitution would be violated in one portion, which provoked the mentality to succeed from the union (Doc G). While the South argued for the right to own slaves since the idea of property is linked to the constitution, the North used the Constitution to prove that slavery was unconstitutional. Proven through the strict interpretation of the Constitution,as the word ‘slaves’ and ‘slavery’ are not written anywhere within the Constitution. Therefore, these slaves are not protected by the government, and the Union does not stand with these Slaveholders (Doc E). In regards to differing viewpoints between the Confederacy and Union, the Constitution was bound to break under the pressure of slavery.

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

This case had to deal with the rights of the enslaved individuals in Missouri at the time. Dred Scott and his owner moved to Illinois. The reason why this case came to be was because in the state of Illinois, slavery was made illegal. After, moving to this state Dred then refusal to move back to Missouri where enslavement was allowed. The reason for Scott refused to move because now that he is in Illinois where enslavement was banned, he believes that he was a free man.

Read More
1873 Words | 8 Pages

In the Dred Scott vs Sandford Court Case, the US supreme court proved this by declaring that black slaves were just considered property and could not sue in court. Dred Scott, an african slave, came with his owner to the Northwest Ordinance during the mid eighteenth century and lived there for two years. However, Congress previously declared that slavery was outlawed within that territory within the Missouri Compromise, as it stated any states above the 36 parallel were free states. As a result Dred Scott believed that he should have been freed and sued his owner till it got to the Supreme Court, where he was declared as just property, not as United States citizen, therefore not allowed to sue in court. “Dred Scott was a negro slave, the lawful property of the defendant; and as to the issue thirdly above joined, we, the jury, find that wife of said Dred Scott, and Eliza and Lizzie, the daughters of the said Dred Scott, were negro slaves, the lawful property of the defendant."

Read More
1104 Words | 5 Pages

Originally, as a new nation emerging, the United States was focused on building and stabilizing itself in order to seem powerful to foreign countries. However, as time went on, the North and the South disagreed over various issues and were eventually divided. Many events arose which worsened the split between the North and South after the Antebellum Era, resulting in the South seceding from the Union. The reason why Southern states seceded from the Union in 1860 and 1861 was the controversy over slavery between the North and the South. One main event that contributed to the controversy over slavery and the South’s secession was Abraham Lincoln’s election.

Read More
873 Words | 4 Pages

Dred Scott reported that Mrs. Emerson beat him and treated him terribly. Hence, why he decided to fight for the freedom that he believe he deserved. Two out of the three justices were pro slavery making it a hard battle to fight for Dred

Read More
939 Words | 4 Pages

The North and South were divided on whether or not slavery was permitted to exist. When the Missouri Compromise was made, it maintained balance by “allowing Missouri to enter as a slave state and Maine as a free state”[4]. Such balance was vital, because in the perspective of the North, the better the containment of slavery in the south, the less of a chance that it could spread. Furthermore, in terms of sectional tensions, the Missouri Compromise proved adequate short term. It’s advocation of the rights of citizens gave the people of Missouri the option to create a state government that could “write a state constitution that would permit slavery”[2].

Read More
756 Words | 4 Pages

America’s founders created the constitution in order to create unification and order in the United States. However, there have been controversy surrounding the interpretation of the constitution, this has caused debate over many issues within the country. These issues and the lack of wartime policy within the constitution directly lead to the Civil War, which was one of the worst alterations this nation has faced. The Missouri compromise, the Dred Scott decision, and Bleeding Kansas were controversial issues surrounding the constitution that directly lead to the Civil War.

Read More
1122 Words | 5 Pages

How the Civil War Came to Be Was the Civil War very “civil” at all? The Civil War had many factors that led into it but there was one major factor that started the war. Slavery was one of the biggest factors in the Civil War. There was a big issue that divided the North and South which was slavery. The wide spread of slavery was a big deal to most Americans; but some were not the biggest fans of the concept.

Read More
670 Words | 3 Pages

The 1820 Missouri Compromise drew an imaginary line dividing the country in two. In the north slavery was not allowed and in the south slavery was allowed. Congress devised a two part compromise. It granted Missouri statehood as a slave state and admitted Maine as a free state, restoring the political balance.

Read More
819 Words | 4 Pages

In 1846, slavery was a very big thing in America. But if a colored man asked if he could be free, would you say no? Well in Dred Scott’s case, that became a reality. That’s why The Dred Scott Decision was significant to American History and it led to the Civil War.

Read More
1566 Words | 7 Pages

Through the Supreme Court rulings such as in the Dred Scott case, the North and South fought numerous times over slavery. The North feared the many potential consequences of this case. The South was reluctant to give up slavery for various reasons. The Dred Scott v. Sandford case set precedent for other cases with similar conflicts. This case also provided reasons for the Civil War to occur between the North and South.

Read More
1015 Words | 5 Pages

Though the Northerners wanted to get rid of slavery completely in every state, they were unwilling to let it continue to grow across the nation. As for the South’s views on spreading to the West; in a court case called for by a slace named Dred Scott, John C. Calhoun believed that “life, liberty, and property” appartained to slaves- ‘slaves count as property, so they can be taken anywhere’. The South also forced its influence on the states-such as California-that did not want to become slave states. Bleeding Kansas was an important event in the spread to the West. Pro-slavery groups snuck into Kansas to influence the popular sovereignty vote to be in favor of slavery.

Read More
338 Words | 2 Pages

Many events occurred leading up to the Civil War, that divided the nation and would cause long term effects on the country. Debates, discriminatory encounters, and political disputes were all contributors to the downfall of the nation before the Civil War. The Constitution, secession, and the Inaugural Address also threatened the unity of the country. The Missouri crisis was more or less the turning point of the country and provided a reason for disunion to be in the future. There was an argument over whether Missouri would be a slave state or a free state.

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 What Is The Basis Of The Dred Scott V. Sandford Case

Related Topics

Open Document