A slave by the name of Dred Scott was brought by his master from Missouri to live for a short time in the free state of Illinois. Upon returning to Missouri, Scott began to argue that he should be allowed to live free since he had lived in a free state. He sued for his freedom in 1854, and appealed to the Supreme Court when the state court ruled against him.
Scott's lawyers argued that Scott's wife, whom had married while in the free state of Illinois, and his
daughter, born while on a steamboat back to Missouri, should be allowed to live from then on in emancipation. Under Chief Justice Roger Taney, the Supreme Court ruled that African Americans were not considered, and never could be considered, citizens. They added that because of this, they were not allowed to sue in court. Scott remained enslaved. Chief Justice Taney went on to say that by banning slavery, Congress was taking away peoples' property. All congressional efforts to ban slavery in the territories was prohibited. Many dissenters argued that previous acts of Congress, such as the Northwest Ordinance, had limited slavery, and no one had claimed that these acts violated property rights, and therefore the Fifth Amendment. Nevertheless, Taney's strong proslavery position became a part of the national law.
After the Civil War, the Thirteenth Amendment (1865) and the Fourteenth Amendment (1868) showed the federal government's efforts to abolish slavery. Dred Scott vs. Sandford could no longer be used a precedent for future cases. It was instead viewed as one of the worst decisions ever made by the Supreme Court.
by Cat and Mira
5 comments:
The summarization of the case was good and solid, however, it would help if you defined the amendments mentioned. This would further push your point out and make your topic easier to digest.
Also, be careful when transferring your text because some of it has been cut off.
The post was great. It was very fluid and easy to read. The introduction was very strong. Check the spelling of some words. Other than that it was a nice post.
Very good summary of the event. Spell check may have been useful, but overall a very solid post.
overall this topic was very clear and easy to read. Good work girls. Only problem for me was that the text was sort of small. Other then that I give you 10/10 =)
Wow. This blog really suprised me. I never knew how blatent and cruel even Supreme Court Justices were back then. This blog did a great job of summarizing this event in an easy-to-read way. Maybe next time you could use a larger font- I had to move it to Word to read it without getting a headache.
Post a Comment