From the lectures in class we learned about the 1857 Dred Scott case. Dred Scott was a slave who fought for his freedom in front of the Supreme Court, but was denied. Scott’s argued that he had lived as a slave with his owner in territories where slavery was illegalj and should therefore be set free. The Supreme Court voted 7 to 2 against Dred Scott. Their decision was based on the fact that Scott owned no property and was not a citizen of the
I was interested to learn of the repercussions of this court case. As a result of the court’s decision the Missouri Compromise was made void. It was also asserted that any person descended from black Africans (whether slave or free) is not a citizen of the
3 comments:
I too find it ironic that this case cause so many problems down the road. It almost seems unfair that because of this case they felt the need to take all of the other compromises and acts that had been established.
Great points Nina. After the Supreme Court voided much of the "compromising" that had gone on in Congress, do you think war was now inevitable? Or was there still a way for the slavery conflict to be dealt with through diplomacy?
I also found this case very interesting to learn about. It is unfair that he was blamed for not owning his own land but the men blaming him are the reason for slavery. Its like starving someone them punishing them for stealing food!
Post a Comment