answersLogoWhite

0

  • The South thought the decision was a license to travel in the North with their slaves, and perhaps even spread the institution of slavery into free states.
  • The Abolitionists were infuriated, and the North generally was baffled and frustrated, leading Lincoln and Douglas to argue this question in a series of public debates.
  • The Supreme Court declared the Missouri Compromise unconstitutional, and held Congress had no right to regulate slavery in the states, nullifying federal anti-slavery legislation and hardening the political rivalry between North and South.
  • With federal agreements canceled, the territories planning to join the Union had to decide by popular vote whether to become a free state or slave state. This lead to such extreme violence between pro-slavery and anti-slavery factions that Kansas earned the nickname "Bloody Kansas."
  • The case played a major role in precipitating the Civil War. The Supreme Court's decision stirred deep‐seeded emotions in the already heated battle of race relations in the United States.
  • The Dred Scott decision explicitly denied state and federal citizenship to all African-Americans and ended the "once free, always free" standard courts applied to emancipate slaves who had lived in free territory.
  • The Court interpreted the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment literally, declaring a man's property was sacred and could not be taken without due process (and compensation). According to Chief Justice Taney, slaves were property and could not be emancipated even if living on free soil.

Case Citation:

Dred Scott v. Sanford, 60 US 393 (1857)

User Avatar

Wiki User

9y ago

Still curious? Ask our experts.

Chat with our AI personalities

FranFran
I've made my fair share of mistakes, and if I can help you avoid a few, I'd sure like to try.
Chat with Fran
RafaRafa
There's no fun in playing it safe. Why not try something a little unhinged?
Chat with Rafa
EzraEzra
Faith is not about having all the answers, but learning to ask the right questions.
Chat with Ezra
More answers

ok so i think this is right but im not sure...the dred scott decision was that dred was not a free man because he A.) had no right to sue considering he was a slave and was not considered an american citizin. (because he was a slave.) B.) he merely lived in those free territories, his master did not permantatly settle there so there for he was not a free man.

the supreme court justice: Robert Taney.
Denied, Dred Scott lost the case

User Avatar

Wiki User

12y ago
User Avatar

First of all, it's Dred Scott v. Sanford. The Chief Justice Roger B. Taney stated that any African/African American-slave or not-couldn't be a citizen of the U.S. Referring to the Declaration of Independence ("all men are created equal") he said the following:

"it is too clear for dispute, that the enslaved African race were not intended to be included, and formed no part of the people who framed and adopted this declaration. . . ."

User Avatar

Wiki User

7y ago
User Avatar

lose

User Avatar

Wiki User

12y ago
User Avatar

Add your answer:

Earn +20 pts
Q: What was the result of the dread Scott decision?
Write your answer...
Submit
Still have questions?
magnify glass
imp