...Dred Scott was an enslaved African American man who sued for his freedom in front of the Supreme Court in 1857. Dred Scott was moved to Illinois, which was a free state and lived there for a long time. His owner moved him back to a slave state and said that he still isn't free even though he lived in a free state. Congress had said that if a slave lives in a free state for a certain amount of time, the become free. Sanford did not agree and so he took it to court. The first time they were in favor of Sanford so Scott appealed to the Supreme Court, but the Supreme court also ruled in Sanford's favor saying that Dred Scott was not a person, he was property and therefore could not file a lawsuit because he was not a citizen of the United States. They also declared that congress did not have power to outlaw slavery in any territory. Eventually someone bought Scott and set him free. In Chief Justice Taney’s statement the claim he makes is that Dred Scott is not a person, he was property and therefore could not file a lawsuit because he was not a citizen of the United States. Slaves do not count as citizens and do not apply to “we the people” in the Declaration of...
Words: 540 - Pages: 3
...surgeon purchased a slave, Dred Scott, in the slave state of Missouri. Eventually they moved to Illinois in 1833, which is in the Wisconsin Territory, and according to the Missouri Compromise, Missouri was a slave state and slavery was prohibited north of the 36’30N line so in turn, Illinois was a free state. Scott lived there for four years employing himself with side work while Emerson was away. By 1840, Scott had a wife and a family of two children while Emerson married Eliza Irene Sanford. They moved to Louisiana and then St. Louis before Emerson died is 1843 and left Scott and his family in the hands of Eliza Sanford. The Scotts wanted to become free and they saved until 1846, when Dred Scott sought to buy their freedom but Sanford denied....
Words: 447 - Pages: 2
...His case was called ‘’Dred Scott v. Sanford’’. He actually made it to court. Dred Scott made history happen by going to court for his freedom. His statement or what his whole is built upon was the statement that he had lived with Dr. Emerson in free territories like Illinois, that when Dr. Emerson died he Dred Scott thought he was free. The process began in 1846. Dred Scott had lost his first trial in a local St. Louis district court but, he then won his second trial, only to find out that the decision overturned by the Missouri State Supreme Court. Although he was rejected he would not give up for his and his wife’s freedom. Nothing was going to get in his way. He wasn’t alone. He had a team of people who hated slavery. Dred Scott then filed his suit in St....
Words: 1176 - Pages: 5
...Today, the United States Supreme Court is regularly lambasted for many of the decisions it makes, and the phrase “worst decision in history” is regularly thrown around. The polarized political climate in the United States combined with a twenty four hour media cycle helps push this perspective, but in reality the vast majority of Supreme Court decisions are not nearly as good or bad as the public wants to believe. Of course, there are exceptions, especially historical ones. The landmark 1857 case of Dred Scott vs. Sandford is an outstanding example of a Supreme Court decision that was both as horrible as it seems, as well as impactful for a large amount of people in the United States, directly. This paper will analyze the Dred Scott decision,...
Words: 2011 - Pages: 9
...Dred Scott vs. Sanford: The Dred Scott vs. Sanford case is one of the most important cases that have ever been tried in the United States of America and was heard in the Old Courthouse of St. Louis. This case that is usually known as the Dred Scott Decision was a ruling by the Supreme Court of America that African people imported into the country and detained as slaves were not protected by the U.S Constitution and could never be American citizens. Dred Scott was a slave who sued for his freedom from his master in a Missouri court in the year 1846. As part of his arguments, Dred Scott claimed that he resided in Illinois which was a free state and part of the Louisiana Territory. Therefore, he claimed that he was a free man because of his residence in a free territory in which slavery was prohibited by the 1820 Missouri Compromise (“Dred Scott v. Sanford” par, 1). However, Dred Scott’s suit for freedom in the local federal court in Missouri was unsuccessful. Eleven years later after his initial suit in the Missouri court, Scott brought a new suit in the United States’ Supreme Court. This was after the federal court ordered the jury to depend on Missouri law for the conclusion of the case regarding Scott’s freedom. Additionally, Scott decided to appeal to the United States’ Supreme Court following the decision of the Missouri Supreme Court to consider him as a slave. In his defense, Scott’s master maintained that the American Constitution did not allow people of African...
Words: 2148 - Pages: 9
...which completely voids the Dred Scott Case. It was an important day because it helped African Americans achieve the rights that they deserved, even though, they never thought they would see the day of gaining these rights. Over the years, these slave’s only hope was to be free. Dred Scott was a slave in Missouri to the Emerson family, but Emerson died in 1846 and that’s when Scott decided to sue for his freedom. The case was ruled in a state court where he lost, but afterwards the case was brought up in a national court. After the case went to national court, Dred Scott lost the case, but was later labeled a free man. Like most things, this Dred Scott case had a lot of positive impacts, as well as some negative impacts. Some impacts include the Republican Party grew more firm because they strongly opposed the courts ruling; and it forced the abolitionist to discard slavery as well and all this tension leads to the civil war. A couple extreme impacts from the Dred Scott Case is it leading to a couple fights, such as Bleeding Kansas, and it also led to the Panic of 1857. Even with these troubles, it seemed worth it because it caused...
Words: 1051 - Pages: 5
...The Dred Scott Case Scott v. Sandford was Dred Scott’s second attempt at suing for his freedom. Not only did this case spark conflicts between the North and South, but it also was a cause for the Civil War. Even today, a court case has not received as much controversy as Scott v. Sandford (Dred Scott…Case). The controversial case of Dred Scott can be examined through Scott’s motive for suing, the harsh opinion of the Chief Justice, and the outcome and influence of the case. Scott was traveling with his master, John Emmerson, to Illinois and the Wisconsin territory as part of Emmerson’s job and after the death of Emmerson in 1843, Scott decided to sue Emmerson’s wife for his freedom in the state court. He stated that living in free soil made him a free man, but this court case did not go in his favor (Dred Scott v. Sandford). After this court case, Emmerson’s wife sold him to her brother-in-law, John...
Words: 586 - Pages: 3
...The Dred Scott Case Throughout American history, there have been numerous blunders within our legal system. Perhaps the most intriguing failure within our American legal system was the Dred Scott Case. The Dred Scott Case is perhaps the most infamous case in American history as Dred Scott, a slave who had been free for a rather long period of time, sued the Missouri court system and eventually the U.S. Supreme Court for his freedom and was denied. Numerous excellent arguments were made by the legal team of Dred Scott, however, perhaps the most intriguing that Americans truly take for granted was the debate as to whether being free for an extended period of time entitles someone to freedom for the rest of their life. This case became so intense that...
Words: 711 - Pages: 3
...Dred Scott Decision Dred Scott was a slave and social activist who served several masters before suing for his freedom ("Dred Scott." Biography.com). His date of birth is unknown, but his year that he was born in is available. He was born in Southampton County, Virginia, in the year of 1795. The minute he was born he was a slave, his whole family were slaves. His owner was Peter Blow. Peter Blow was born in 1777, and he was a farmer. Blow was later transferred to Alabama, then again in 1830 to St. Louis, Missouri. He took his slaves with him to each state. Two year after being transferred to St. Louis, he died. He died in St. Louis, Missouri in 1832. His slaves were sold to a surgeon who was apart of the army. The surgeon/doctor was Dr. John Emerson. When John was sent on a mission to Wisconsin, he took Dred with him. Dred found a lovely lady whose name was Harriet Robinson, and she was also a slave. While Dr. Emerson would be away on business, Dred would hire himself to work so he could save up...
Words: 667 - Pages: 3
...Schooner Amistad, Dred Scott v. Sanford, and Albeman v. Booth were three court classes that had a major significance in impacting the status of both free and insullted Blacks in the United States. In the Schooner Amistad case Africans slaves onboard the Schooner La Amistad rebelled and killed the captain of the ship. After killing their captain they then demanded going back to Africa, but instead they ended up near Long Island, New York. The result of the case was that the transporting was going against many laws and treaties. The court ruling was that these men were free and that they were just fighting for their freedom. The Schooner Amistad case played a major significance because this gave Africans this gave the right to take any measure possible to secure their freedom. Dred Scoot v. Sanford was another court case that had a major significance on the United Stated....
Words: 480 - Pages: 2
...The Dred Scott Decision (1857) Jordan Stuart History 121- Early America to the Civil War Professor Hamilton November 11, 2013 Dred Scott, who was born into slavery in Virginia, moved with his owner to St. Louis, Missouri. After Scott’s original owner had died the ownership was sold to John Emerson. Throughout many years Dred Scott moved with John Emerson to many free states. Once Emerson died, the ownership of Dred Scott was passed to Irene Sanford Emerson, John Emerson’s wife. At this point Scott attempted to buy his freedom but Irene refused, thus creating an uprising of controversial court cases. Dred Scott claimed he had become free while living in free states and that once free he could not be reenslaved. Dred Scott fought for his freedom in court until his case made it to the Supreme Court. The Dred Scott decision of 1857 ruled that African-Americans, free or enslaved, could never be citizens of the United States and held no rights under the Constitution. This decision proved to have a dramatic effect on American politics. The ruling of Chief Justice Taney was the most important decision ever issued on slavery. The Dred Scott decision was controversial, raising many questions regarding African Americans as citizens, whether or not the congress had the right to prohibit slavery in any territory, and the equality of all men under the Declaration of Independence. The question brought up in court was whether a negro whose ancestors were imported into the United...
Words: 646 - Pages: 3
...Dred Scott was an individual who was denied his freedom, treated poorly by the courts, a case in which split the U.S in two. Born into slavery in virginia, Dred was purchased in a Missouri slave market by Army Doctor John Emerson. He was later brought to fort shelling in 1836 by way of Fort Armstrong in Illinois Dred Scott wanted court to set him free, because his owner wanted to take Dred to live in illinois, and wisconsin territory where slavery was legal. Chief Justice Roger Tony saw this case as a way to end the question of slavery. This Dred Scott Decision had the power to legalize slavery all over the U.S. It was ruled that congress had no authority to prevent the spread of slavery to territories, and it was argued that free blacks like Dred had NO RIGHTS to be respected by a white person, and that they can be reduced back into slavery for “white man's benefit”. Dred Married a free slave named Harriet they moved in together into Fort Shelling until 1840 when they sued for freedom 6 years later under the northwest ordinance. The government saw this ordinance as unconstitutional and gave no rights to people of color, nor free slaves. This increased slavery everywhere. This casted Dred into a deep depression. This decision hung over the abolitionist...
Words: 403 - Pages: 2
...war took place. The U.S Supreme Court issued what became as their decision on the case of Dred Scott v. Sanford. Why was was this case brought upon in the first place? Dred Scott brought the case before the court himself. Scott was looking for freedom from slavery. Before getting into the case, some information about Scott is mandatory. Scott, born sometime during the year of 1795, in Southampton County, Virginia. Where he was born into slavery. After several years, Scott’s first owner died, where then he was sold to a U.S. army doctor, Dr. Emerson. In 1836 Scott would go on to marry Harriett Robinson where her ownership was transferred over to...
Words: 831 - Pages: 4
...The full name of the case of Dred Scott v. John F. A. Sandford and it took place during 1856 and 1857. It was a decision by the United States Supreme Court on US labor law and constitutional law. Dred Scott was an enslaved man of “the negro African race” who had been taken by his owners to free states and territories. Montgomery Blair and George Ticknor Curtis were Scott’s lawyer for the case before the Supreme Court case.The Supreme Court then ruled in Sanford’s favor by a 7-2 ruling because they did not consider Scott as a citizen. Since he was not a citizen, he didn’t not have the right to sue Sanford, who is a citizen. The judgment was reversed and the case was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Following the Missouri Compromise, the...
Words: 267 - Pages: 2
...Justin Fortuny 9/29/16 Mrs. Perez Period 8 Dred Scott v. Sandford Dred Scott v. Sandford was in 1856-1857. This was when the Supreme Court stated that African Americans were not American citizens and could not sue in federal court. During this time, the Court also ruled that Congress lacked the power to ban slavery on U.S. territories. After, the Court declared that the rights of slave owners were protected by the Fifth Amendment because slaves were seen as property. This means that slaves were seen as objects and something you can buy with money. This problem began in 1833, when Dr. John Emerson bought Dred Scott and eventually moved Scott to a base in the Wisconsin Territory. Slavery was banned in the territory near the Missouri Compromise. Scott lived there for the next four years. He hired himself out for work during the long stretches when Emerson was away. During 1840, Scott, his wife, and their children moved to Louisiana and then to St. Louis with Emerson. Emerson died in 184.This left the Scott family to his wife (Eliza Irene Sanford). In 1846, after years of laboring, the Scotts wanted to buy their freedom from Sanford, but she refused. Dred Scott then sued Sanford in a state court, arguing that he was legally free because he...
Words: 805 - Pages: 4
