Dred Scott Vs. Sanford: Effects On American History

To first understand why Mr. Dred Scott decided to sue for his freedom, we have to understand the prelude to his story. Even before Dred Scott was born a case in London was buzzing that would emancipate slaves and some historians believe the case contributed to increasing colonial support for separatism in the Thirteen Colonies of British North America, by parties on both sides of the slavery question who wanted to establish independent government and law (Britannica). The case was Somerset v. Stewart and it has been deemed one of the most important legal actions in the history of the antislavery movement (Weiner 71). The facts of the case were that James Somerset was a slave of Charles Stewart, an officer in the British colony of Boston in

In 1857 the Supreme Court overruled a previous decision by the circuit court of St. Louis County, Missouri. The Case of Dred Scott versus John F. A. Sandford would go down in history as one of the courts most erroneous rulings. This verdict called into question a slaves rights in free states, popular sovereignty and the legality of the Missouri Compromise. Dred Scott had won a previous court battle over his former master John Sandford claiming that he had assaulted his wife and children and that he should in fact be a free man because he had been moved to Illinois and Wisconsin for a time. Since both were free territories he should in fact be free.

The court case Dred Scott vs. Sanford — 1856 to 1857 — was vital regarding the lives of enslaved or non-liberated African Americans. The outcome of this trial changed the perspective of slaves all across the United States. Rights concerning liberated and enslaved Americans from Africa were declared and enforced in this case. In 1833, John Emerson — a medical surgen of the US Army — purchased a slaved named Dred Scott.

Scott had filed another suit in court in 1854 against John Sanford. The case was favored to John Sanford but Scott turned to the U.S. Supreme court. On March 6, 1857, after 11 years of the Dred Scott v. Sanford, seven out of nine judges from the Supreme Court decided that slaves were not citizens of the United States. Which also led to the decision that they had no rights to sue

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.

Scott knew he had to fight for not only his own freedom, but every other colored man’s freedom that put their faith in him. Because of this long journey Scott took, slavery was abolished. Who knew this case would ever turnaround, only time would tell. All persons born in the United States were NOW declared to be United States citizens, signifying that the Scott vs. Sanford case truly reversed the way people viewed the nation. Sadly, Dred Scott’s life came to an end, but he wouldn’t be forgotten after all the chaos the court’s put him through.

This act had limited the spread of slavery into the new territories. Dred was influenced to become who he is from all the hardships he’s faced as a slave and as a social activist suing for his freedom. Dred Scott became more noticed and popular when he fought in court against Sandford to gain his freedom (Dred Scott v Sandford). Dred had to overcome many things in his life to become who he was. For example, Dred scott’s guardian ms.ermon sold him to her brother; he had been a slave for a long time until he battled in court for his

For Lincoln, one of these main occurrences that influenced him was the Dred Scott decision handed down by Justice Roger B. Taney. In his final decision, Taney concluded that no African-American could truly become an American citizen. This decision was in opposition to the beliefs of a large section of the American populous, Lincoln and his Republican party included. Lincoln’s ideals as a Republican were fighting to stop the spread of slavery, not the abolishment of the institution as a whole. Lincoln epitomizes this when he wrote “peaceful extinction of slavery…” this meant Lincoln did not necessarily see the need behind the ending of slavery completely rather then its complete existence being

Daniel Clouson Mr. Nelson American Government April 1, 2016 Dred Scott v. Sanford Long ago, when slavery was about, a man named Dred Scott wanted to be a free man, but since he was black slave he could not get any freedom. The supreme court decision in Dred Scott v.s Sanford is wrong. It has been wrong for over many years and slavery has stopped when the 13th amendment came about. The Dred Scott decision was one of the most tragic cases. To fully understand the opinion of the court, it is imperative to know the background of Scott v. Sandford.

His case reached the U.S. Supreme Court in 1857 as Dred Scott v. Sandford. The verdict declared Scott a slave and the Missouri Compromise unconstitutional. In a 7-2 vote, Dred Scott v. Sandford was decided because of the historical context and the Fifth Amendment. Dred Scott v. Sandford occurred while tensions over the slavery debate were high. Over the course of eleven years and five trials, sectional tensions increased until America was on the brink of a Civil War.

This decision angered both northerners and southerners. The North was upset due to the decision, which declared that black Americans didn’t count as citizens, which made no effort in the abolition of slavery. The South’s issue was that the majority of their state population was African American, and would give them less representatives if they did not count as citizens, or people in general. This affected the election of Abraham Lincoln, which led to the South’s succession and the start of the

Then the two went to the Supreme Court to workout their differences. Additionally, this case had lots of importance. Saying that slaves were not citizens of the U.S. Furthermore, slaves would not be protected by the Federal Government and courts (Dred Scott v. John F.A. Sanford) . On the other hand, in the

( http://www.watson.org/~lisa/blackhistory/scott/impact.html) The case was known as the Dred Scott V. Sanford which impacted all African Americans throughout the U.S. Dred Scott said he was a free man because

Topic: Scottsboro Trials Sources: Remembering Scottsboro: The legacy of an infamous trial, The Trials of the Scottsboro boys, and Scottsboro and its legacy: The cases that challenged american legal and social justice. Thesis: The Scottsboro Trials were an important piece of history because it was a huge stepping stone of the civil rights movement and it showed the racial inequality in America which was then taken to the supreme court. (support statement) No crime in American history, produced as many trials, convictions, reversals and retrials as did the alleged gang rape of two white girls by nine black teenagers. (Supported Statement 2)

‘Slavery was the root cause of secession’. ‘November 6 1860, Lincoln was elected president of America which resulted in panic emerging in the South’ . The election of Lincoln as president who was a Republican leader meant that ideologies, movements and values from the North would be implemented in the South which meant the abolition of slavery. Slavery was a huge characteristic of the South as the economy; politics; social status and psychological mind-sets were influenced by the process of slavery. The southern white population then derived the idea of secession which meant the South would gain independence from Northern aggression .