“…they are not included, and were not intended to be included, under the word “citizens” in the Constitution, and can therefore claim none of the rights and privileges that instrument provides for and secure to citizens of the United States (Taney).” Historical Context:
Dr. John Emerson, who was a United States Army Surgeon, bought Dred Scott, a slave born into slavery. Emerson was a citizen of Missouri, although Scott and his master spent much time in Illinois and the Territory of Wisconsin. In these two places, slavery was prohibited due to the provisions under the Missouri Compromise. Following the death of Emerson in 1846, Scott sued in 1847 for his freedom with claims that his crossing to free soil made him free. Losing his case in the state courts, Scott became into possession of John Sanford, abolitionist from New York, who aided Scott’s case by taking it to the federal courts (Dred Scott Case). This was possible due to the matter involving disputes between the residents of different states. The Dred Scott case eventually reached the Supreme Court as Dred Scott v. Sanford. Chief Justice Roger B. Taney presided this case; he was the writer of the Majority Opinion in the ruling of the Dred Scott case. Thesis:
Chief Justice Roger B. Taney decision in the Dred Scott’s Supreme Court case that no slave or descendant of a slave could become a United States citizen nor had ever been a citizen- thus being stated, Dred Scott had no right to sue in a Federal Court. Evidence:
* With the majority opinion of the Dred Scott decided with a 7-2 ruling, the United States Supreme Court held the following: * When referring to the fact that Dred Scott was not a citizen, it was decided as well that African Americans as a whole were not entitled to be citizens of either the United States or individual states. The court ruling affected the status of every enslaved and free African American in the United States. African...