Court, 1857) 1. Facts: -Dred Scott was a slave taken by his new owner, Dr. Emerson to Illinois, Michigan, and Wisconsin. -This all happened during the time the Missouri Compromise was considered lawful. -When Scott was permitted to marry Harriet Robinson, later the two went to live with Dr. Emerson and his wife. -After being a slave under Dr. Emerson’s widowed wife, in 1846, Scott sought to purchase his freedom along with his family but was denied, therefore taking the issue to court and suing Irene Emerson Sandford (and later John Sandford). 2. Procedural history: -When Scott first took this case to the St. Louis County Circuit Court, it was decided that he was a free man however Sandford issued an appeal to the Supreme Court of the state. -The Missouri Supreme Court returned the case to the Circuit …show more content…
Ferguson (U.S. Supreme Court, 1896) 1. Facts: -The plaintiff, Plessy, was a mixed race Louisiana resident with mostly Caucasian descent and “one-eighth African blood” (p. 1). -Plessy considered himself to be rightfully allowed the same rights as those who were White and purchased a first class ticket for a train, therefore sitting with White passengers. -When it was learned that Plessy was of mixed race, he was thrown off the train and immediately arrested and put in jail. -He was convicted of violating a law that justified the separation of races on trains. 2. Procedural history: -In the district court, Plessy was charged for violating the law but countered that this decision was unconstitutional. -The district court then filled a demurrer stating that unless “enjoined by a writ of prohibition” (p. 1), Plessy would still have to plead guilty for his actions. -The district court also responded that a writ of prohibition was not to be issued in its court and gave it to the state’s Supreme Court. -At the Louisiana Supreme Court, the verdict remained that the law prohibiting Plessy from sitting in the “whites only” car was
Summary of Source The editorial discloses the power that the Court adheres to and whether it should be accountable for the decision making of fugitive slaves. The writer had discussed that in no way did the verdict of the Dred Scott case follow an act of law, but was merely “nullity.” During the settlement, they decided that since Dred Scott’s master had brought him on free land in Missouri or of the United States without having a citizenship, which resulted in him having no case. It continues on to say that the jurisdiction of the case was influenced by opinion, which did not involve any legalities.
In 1833, Dred Scott was purchased as a slave by John Emerson, an army surgeon who was moved from Missouri, the place he was bought, to a base in the Wisconsin Territory. However, under the Missouri Compromise of 1820, slavery was banned there, making the area a “free” state. Nonetheless, Scott continued to work as a laborer for Emerson for the next four years, and was a hired hand whenever the surgeon would go out of town for business. After moving around with Emerson, as well as his family, Scott was willed to Emerson’s wife Eliza Irene Stanford after his owner’s death in 1843. Eliza refused to set the Scott family free after they wished to purchase their freedom, causing Dred Scott to sue her in a state court, alleging that he was free under
Illinois was a free territory meaning that slavery was forbidden. Scott did not file for freedom nor live as a free man at the time. Dr. Emerson is then given new orders to relocate to Fort Snelling in Wisconsin. While living in Wisconsin, Scott met his wife Harriet Robinson who was also a slave from another army physician who he married in 1837. Dr. Emerson who was currently at the time
In 1890, the state of Louisiana passed a law (the Separate Car Act) that required separate accommodations for blacks and whites on railroads, including separate railway cars.[2] Concerned, a group of prominent black, creole, and white New Orleans residents formed the Comité des Citoyens (Committee of Citizens) dedicated to repeal the law or fight its effect.[3] They persuaded Homer Plessy, a man of mixed race, to participate in an orchestrated test case. Plessy was born a free man and was an "octoroon" (of seven-eighths European descent and one-eighth African descent). However, under Louisiana law, he was classified as black, and thus required to sit in the "colored" car.[4]
He was soon arrested for violating the 1890 law. When Plessy was convicted of violating the 1890 law during his trial, he soon filed a petition against the judge, John H. Ferguson. Ferguson
Dred Scott was a slave in Missouri, but from 1833-1843, he lived in places where slavery was illegal. When Scott returned to Missouri, he believed that because he lived in free territory, he was a free man. He sued without success in Missouri courts. Scott’s master said that Dred Scott couldn’t be a citizen because of Article III of the Constitution. In the end, Dred Scott lost and had to return to slavery.
Illinois was a free state where they lived for two years and a half years. Dred did not know he could sue for his freedom while he was living in the free state of Illinois. In 1836 Dred Scott met Harriet Robinson at Fort Snelling in the Wisconsin Territory. Harriet was owned by Major Lawrence Toliaferro.
The year of 1965 the black community let out a collective victory cry. They had finally gotten the rights they fought hard for. They could at last vote, go to school and college, and got the working condition they deserve. They couldn 't have done it without Martin Luther King Jr., but there were a slew of cases that were tried and further assisted in opening the black community 's opportunity pool. They were well known cases, like the Plessy vs. Ferguson, Brown vs. Board of Education, and the Regents of the University vs. Bakke, all very influential cases in the fight for rights.
Ferguson was a case of the Supreme Court in 1892 after passenger Homer Plessy traveled on the Louisiana railroad and refused to sit in a car for blacks only. Homer Plessy was brought before Judge John H. Ferguson to a Criminal Court in New Orleans to be trailed for refusing to follow the state law of Louisiana “separate but equal.” Such conflict challenged the violation of the 13th and 14th amendment where they ensure equality for recently emancipated slaves. They stated, “Separate facilities for blacks and whites satisfied the Fourteenth Amendment so long as they were equal.” “In the nature of things it could not have been intended to abolish distinctions based upon color, or to enforce social, as distinguished from political equality, or a commingling of the two races unsatisfactory to either.”
Dred Scott was born was a slave in the state of Virginia and was owned by Peter Blow, who died in 1832. Scott only had two masters after Blow’s death; one lived in Wisconsin and later Illinois, both of which prohibited slavery, yet, Scott didn’t petition for freedom. Instead he met his wife Harriet. The two met their new master in Louisiana, who did not grant them freedom, so Scott looked for legal action to escape his slavery. Over a period of seven years, he went through trial and retrial until he was denied his final freedom in 1854.
This shows that the Supreme Court’s decision influenced the spread of Jim Crow laws. The Plessy v. Ferguson decision has had a lasting impact. “Sadly, as a result of the Plessy decision, in the early twentieth century the Supreme Court continued to uphold the legality of Jim Crow laws and other forms of racial discrimination. ”(Separate but Equal).
Prior to the Reconstruction Era, the Union and the Confederate states had just engaged in a war concerning slavery and the unity of the United States, which is also known as the Civil War. The damage from the war was economically, socially and politically devastating to the United States of America as a whole. The newly liberated African Americans were harassed, tormented and even killed in the communities they had developed after the Civil War. Literacy tests were implemented as a way to prevented the miseducated African American male from suffrage. Lastly, early Jim Crow laws originated during this time period.
Dred Scott Dred Scott was born into slavery in the state of Virginia in 1799, but spent many years in several other states in which he was illegally enslaved. Having to move to Missouri with his slave master, Scott spent many years with him as a slave until his master passed away and he was then purchased by John Emerson. When Scott’s owner refused to free him, he then sued for his freedom. Dred Scott lived from 1799 to september 17, 1858. Dred Scott was the first enslaved african american to sue for his freedom, he formed a foundation for future laws against slavery with this case, and he gave hope to all who opposed slavery.
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.
Plessy was arrested after informing the driver that he was an African American because his skin tone allowed him to be mistaken as white American. Plessy challenged the Separate Car Act, passed in 1890