what is the significance of the drett scott case?

Answer 1

Dred Scott. It is a black moment in our history. How wrong it was for a man to have to sue to be declared a citizen. A very black day in our history when the court ruled against him. This just proves that political appointments of fat, old, white men is and was bad for our country.

Bush's court is now making decisions that will go down in history as black days in our history also.

Answer 2

Dred Scott v. Sandford, also known as "the Dred Scott Case" or the "Dred Scott Decision", was a lawsuit decided by the United States Supreme Court in 1857 that ruled that people of African descent, whether or not they were slaves, could never be citizens of the United States, and that Congress had no authority to prohibit slavery in federal territories. The decision for the court was written by Chief Justice Roger Taney.

The decision sided with border ruffians in the Bleeding Kansas dispute who were afraid a free Kansas would be a haven for runaway slaves from Missouri. It enraged abolitionists. The polarization of the slavery debate is considered one of many factors leading to the American Civil War.

The parts of this decision dealing with the citizenship and rights of African-Americans were explicitly overturned by the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution.

Answer 3

It ruled that people of African descent, whether or not they were slaves, could never be citizens of the United States, and that Congress had no authority to prohibit slavery in federal territories. This went against the Missouri Compromise and caused the divide between the North and the South to grow larger.

Answer 4

Dred Scott was a black slave, who was born into slvery and unsuccessfully sued for his freedom. The signifigance is that Dred and his wife were living in a State where slavery was illegal (Illinois) at the time that the suit was brought and it raised the issue of what are a slaves rights when they relocated to a free State.

Answer 5

I'll explain it to you the way a great professor of mine did to me.

The Court basically had two options: A--rule that he was free, and anger the South, or B--rule he was not, and anger the North. However, they, in a clver clever move, chose option C, and evaded the hatred of both (Well, to some extent, at least.).

Answer 6

Property rights, in the absence of the (second) 13th Amendment.

It was wrong, but it was the Court's duty to follow the law in those days, not to write it.

Answer 7

Why are you asking these grade-school questions that can be answered in an instant on the net? Are you practising to teach your 5th grade class?