Dred Scott And Ryland Case

Dred Scott Vs SandFord The case, Dred Scott vs Sandford, (1857) better known as the Dred Scott case was a crucial decision that affected America and it’s black population. Free blacks in America weren’t able to sue the court. The concept of popular sovereignty was also questioned, and blacks with ancestors were imported to America was slave could no longer become citizens. The Case ruled that slaves in free countries are still slaves.

Dred Scott v. Sandford was a landmark decision by the United States Supreme Court on US labor law and constitutional law. The case was decided in 1857 with a 7–2 decision. Scholars today believe it is one of the worst Supreme Court decisions of all time. Dred Scott was born a slave in Virginia in the 1790’s. In 1830, he was bought by Dr. John Emerson. As an army officer, Dr. Emerson moved frequently. After purchasing him they moved to Illinois, where slavery had been prohibited by the Northwest Ordinance of 1787 and by state law. After a few years, Emerson moved to a fort in the Wisconsin Territory, where it was barred by the Missouri Compromise. While there, Scott met and married Harriet Robinson, a slave owned by Lawrence Taliaferro. They had two daughters together. Ownership of Harriet was transferred to Emerson. They returned back to Missouri in 1840. Three years later, Dr. John Emerson died and his widow Irene inherited his

The Dred Scott v. Sandford case had the greatest impact on Race Relations in America because it created a legitimate definition of the citizenship. Scott, a former slave, stated that because of his occupancy in a free state, he is a free man. The other side argued that Scott was still a slave and according to the fifth amendment, no person (master) can be deprived of their property. The initial impact of the case was in favor of the slave owner but this decision was overturned by the adoption of the thirteenth and fourteenth amendment. The thirteenth amendment ended slavery and the fourteenth amendment granted citizenship to everyone born or naturalized in the United States included former slaves who had been freed after the Civil War.

The Results of Dred Scott v Sanford had different effects on American history. This also contributed to the start of the civil war. Dred Scott v Sanford was a court decision on if Dred Scott could sue for his freedom. " According to Supreme Court History, Dred Scott could not sue for his freedom because he was not a citizen. " This was otherwise known as an illegal case. The effects of the Dred Scott decision were Sectional tensions between the north and south, Succession from the union, presidents could not use the term slavery or they would most definitely lose the election. The Contribution to the Civil war that the decision had was that the Republican party was formed, Which made the North and south closer to war.

he Dred Scott decision of 1857 was a significant decision made by the U.S. Supreme Court that declared that blacks, regardless of whether they were free or a slave, had no legal standing because they were not American citizens. The decision was not the first to be made regarding Dred Scott; a Missouri jury ruled in Scott 's favour when Scott claimed that his residence in Illinois and Wisconsin made him free, but the state supreme court ruled against him, which lead to the case being escalated to the US Supreme Court. The US Supreme Court ruled against Scott 7-2.

The trial of the Scottsboro boys was a trial that was the cause of two white women accusing nine black men of raping them. Their appeals, retrials, and legal proceedings attracted the attention of the nation and produced to Supreme Court rulings in their favor. The Scottsboro boys trial demonstrates that nonconformity to unjust practices can lead to justice for all people because their trial triggered The Supreme Court ruling that had a major impact on the American system of laws for the right to adequate counsel, the ruling for the right to not be excluded from a jury based on race, and still has a continuing effect in our own time which affirms the principle of equal protection under the law. Their case not only saved them from the death sentence but also started up debate about equal protection under the law such as in the first Supreme Court ruling.

Buchanan took it upon himself to avoid any issue that had to do with slavery in the territories. Not wanting to face any consequences on the matter, Buchanan push all matters of slavery to the Supreme Court; such as the Dred Scott case. Dred Scott was a slave who decided to sue his slave owner for freedom after he had been taken into territories where slavery was banned. The Supreme Court Justice, Roger Taney, ruled against Scott; “…not only ruled that slaves were property, not people, but also invalidated the Missouri Compromise of 1820, which barred slavery in much of the Louisiana Purchase” (Sheets, 331). Therefore, abolitionists were enraged and “were now convinced that the time had come for more radical, violent action” (Griffin, PP4,

America’s founders created the constitution in order to create unification and order in the United States. However, there have been controversy surrounding the interpretation of the constitution, this has caused debate over many issues within the country. These issues and the lack of wartime policy within the constitution directly lead to the Civil War, which was one of the worst alterations this nation has faced. The Missouri compromise, the Dred Scott decision, and Bleeding Kansas were controversial issues surrounding the constitution that directly lead to the Civil War.

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.

On June 26, 1857, Abraham Lincoln gave a speech on the Dred Scott decision, the Dred Scott is a decision on whether or not the negroes were considered part of the constitution or a “separate class of person”, in the end, they ruled that they were not part of it of the constitution and were considered a “separate class of person”. this got the attention of Abraham Lincoln the president of the united states of america. He gave a speech on how the dred scott decision that chief justice Taney, and the supreme court made was unconstitutional. he explains that the decision was unconstitutional and that the black in five out of the thirteen states that were check shows that black were given the right to vote and some were free negroes. This speech Abraham Lincoln gave spark an argument between the north and south on whether they should keep slavery.

The end result of the Dred Scott decision was Chief Justice Roger Taney 's decision that Congress did not possess the jurisdiction to stop slavery from spreading into other territories, even if they were considered free. Even worse, any free Black could now be allowably forced into slavery. Being forced into slavery was also seen as being beneficial to the free Blacks. Instead of reaching a decision as President Buchanan had hoped, it had started a rapid expansion of the conflict. This rapid expansion over the issue of slavery eventually led to the Civil War.

The Supreme Court presiding over the Dred Scott case was mostly Southerners who feared that the South was in grave danger. Given this fact, it was no surprise that the Supreme Court ruled against Scott, stating that as a Missourian slave, Scott was not a citizen and so not afforded the rights due to a citizen, including the right to sue for his freedom. As a second measure, the Supreme Court also decreed that Congress had no constitutional right to ban the movement of private property, or in this case slaves, from any territory or state. Buchanan's mistake was that he interfered. Before his inaugural speech, Buchanan learned that the Supreme Court’s decision was going to be in favour of the South.

"Racism is a refuge for the ignorant. It seeks to divide and to destroy. It is the enemy of freedom, and deserves to be met head-on and stamped on." (Pierre Berton) The Scottsboro Trials impacted America in a way that cannot be explained by words.

In 1857 the court case of Dread Scott v. Stanford and in 1896 the case Plessy v. Ferguson were introduced into the Supreme Court. They showed people of color were not considered to be anything other than property; the whole majority had no regard for the feelings of another person. The notion of slavery was just coming to light in the United States. As time grew on, the slaves and former slaves were rightly becoming increasingly outraged. Through evaluating language of exclusion throughout both Dread Scott v. Stanford and Plessy v. Ferguson concurrently, anyone can recognize the effects of dehumanization negatively impacting members of the black community. This is disconcerting because African Americans are human beings and should be treated as such.

Ferguson upheld the separate but equal clause. According to the judges the state was following the constitution. Plessy's grievance was rejected stating that this Louisiana state law was not in violation of the constitution because it was separate and equal. This was similar to other cases that upheld segregation such as Roberts v. City of Boston. The separate but equal doctrine still had power for many years after this and this was a precedent that was followed especially in the south.