Dred Scott Vs Sandford Essay
Dred Scott v. Sandford Slavery was a often fought over issue when we were settling the South. Dred Scott v. Sandford is a great example of one of these cases. Dred Scott v. Sandford was a monumental decision made by the United States Supreme Court on the issue of slavery.
In the Dred Scott v. Sandford case, the Supreme Court decided the African people, whether free or slave, were not considered American citizens, and didn’t have the right to sue someone in federal court. During this case, the Court ruled that Congress didn’t have the power to ban slavery in territories. They also declared that the rights of slaveowners were protected by the Fifth Amendment in the Constitution. This is because slaves in their times were not considered people, they were considered as property.
It all started in 1833, when Dr. John Emerson, an U.S. Army surgeon, purchased Dred Scott, a slave, and moved him to a base in the Wisconsin Territory. Slavery was banned in this territory in accordance to the Missouri Compromise. The next four years of his life were spent hiring himself out for work during the long stretches while Emerson was away. In …show more content…
Sandford case made the tension between the South and the North rise. Although the Missouri Compromise had been revoked before the case, the decision appeared to validate the Southern version of national power, and made pro-slavery Southerners bold enough to expand slavery to the far corners of our nation. Not unexpected, antislavery forces were frustrated by the decision, empowering the newly formed Republican Party and helping fuel violence between abolitionists and slaveowners on the frontier. Following the Civil War, Congress passed, and the states ratified the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth Amendments, all of which overturned the Dred Scott v. Sandford case decision. Today, anyone naturalized or born in the United States are American citizens who have a right to bring a lawsuit in federal
In the Dred Scott v. Sandford case, the Supreme Court decided the African people, whether free or slave, were not considered American citizens, and didn’t have the right to sue someone in federal court. During this case, the Court ruled that Congress didn’t have the power to ban slavery in territories. They also declared that the rights of slaveowners were protected by the Fifth Amendment in the Constitution. This is because slaves in their times were not considered people, they were considered as property.
It all started in 1833, when Dr. John Emerson, an U.S. Army surgeon, purchased Dred Scott, a slave, and moved him to a base in the Wisconsin Territory. Slavery was banned in this territory in accordance to the Missouri Compromise. The next four years of his life were spent hiring himself out for work during the long stretches while Emerson was away. In …show more content…
Sandford case made the tension between the South and the North rise. Although the Missouri Compromise had been revoked before the case, the decision appeared to validate the Southern version of national power, and made pro-slavery Southerners bold enough to expand slavery to the far corners of our nation. Not unexpected, antislavery forces were frustrated by the decision, empowering the newly formed Republican Party and helping fuel violence between abolitionists and slaveowners on the frontier. Following the Civil War, Congress passed, and the states ratified the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth Amendments, all of which overturned the Dred Scott v. Sandford case decision. Today, anyone naturalized or born in the United States are American citizens who have a right to bring a lawsuit in federal