Dred Scott And Ryland Case

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.

Roger Brooke Taney made history in the 1857 Dred Scott Case by ruling that black slaves were not citizens of the United States. This controversial historical figure died on October 12, 1864, in Washington, D.C. One of Robert’s most famous quotes was "What Dred Scott's master might lawfully do with Dred Scott, in the free state of Illinois, every other master may lawfully do with any other one, or 1,000 slaves, in Illinois, or in any other free state. "What Robert is saying is that a master of a slave can do whatever he/she wants with that slave. By the time Roger B Taney became Chief Justice, Taney had become a staunch supporter of slavery, even though he had manumitted eleven slaves he inherited as a young man and made anti-slavery statements when serving as defense

The Missouri Supreme Court was ready to hear the case on April 3rd 1848, judge William Scott issued a unanimous decision on June 30th 1848 that “no final judgment upon which a writ of error can only lie”. The case was still just a suit for freedom. On March 17th 1848 Mrs. Emerson had the sheriff of St. Louis County take charge of the Scotts. He hired them out and maintained the wages until the trial was over; they were under his custody until March 1857.

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

The case of Scott vs. Sandford was a major factor in the movement for abolitionist. It empowered the newly republican party, and altered the constitution for the good. Till this day, U.S. colored citizens are now treated like citizens due to the Scott vs. Sandford case. Dred Scott, a slave who was purchased by a U.S surgeon -Dr. John Emerson- who worked for the army, moved together in the Wisconsin territory which was in the northern area.

Dred Scott was taken back into slavery and accused Sandford because Scott was in a free states and claimed that he was in the free state long enough to be a free slave. The Supreme court ruled against Dred Scott, this decision affected blacks preventing them to become citizens and an giving them the right to appeal to a jury and making it harder for a slave to escape because the free states didn’t make a runaway slave a free slave. The case also affected popular sovereignty. Where states got to choose if they were to be a free states or a slave

Scott and his wife file for separate petitions with the court as their petitions are dismissed and their lawyer files for a new trial. Irene then hands over the Scott’s to the St. Louis County Sheriff to be their sole custody as slaves, while the case that Scott had previously filed with the court was being resolved. The court case had a ruling and the Scotts’ were freed from slavery. Mrs. Emerson was not pleased with the court’s ruling and she and her brother appealed the ruling with the Missouri Supreme court and a new trial was started and named – Dred Scott v. Irene Emerson. The Missouri supreme Court decides to reverse their own ruling and Scott and his family are no longer free but slaves again living in a free

Dred Scott’s case had also intensified national divisions over the issue of slavery. In 1834, Dred Scott, a slave, had been taken to Illinois, a free state, and then Wisconsin territory, where the Missouri Compromise of 1820 prohibited slavery. Dred had been “left” by his master for a long time with no word from his master. Dred Scott has decided to challenge for his freedom because he had built a “new life” and his master suddenly one day decided to call him back to him after not hearing from him for months. The court had ruled that African Americans were not citizens, but rather property, and could not sue in

Scott without a doubt was not giving up his fight for freedom this easily because his case could also help other African American slaves stand up for themselves. Sandford was so angry with the fact that Scott won the second trial, Mrs. Emerson, Sanford’s sister took it upon herself to appeal the ruling which then went to the Missouri Supreme Court where Scott had lost in court again (William, 2014). Scott shows that the case was not about money but simply because he had been held illegally by Sanford which is why he sued to make Sanford pay for lost time over the years that he could never get back. In fact, this case was so powerful many believed that it was the cause which leads the Civil War to occur (150 Years Ago, 2007). With the help of the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth Amendment the Dred Scott decision was overturned, which now allows American citizens in the United States to sue in federal court (PBS,

"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.

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.

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.

In conclusion, I believe the implications of the Dred Scott decision of 1865 was for the status of free blacks in the United States. Dred Scott, the African American slave fought for his freedom in Illinois, but was unsuccessful. The court’s decision rose questions and greatly impacted the status of free blacks. The slaves and the free blacks did not apply to the constitution, and were not recognized as citizens, which rose questions as to what rights they had and did not

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.

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.