Dred Scott V Sandford Case Analysis

724 Words2 Pages

The Supreme Court has decided many controversial cases over the years, but the 1857 case of Dred Scott v. Sandford and the 1944 case of Korematsu v. United States stand out as grave miscarriages of justice. In Dred Scott v. Sandford, Dred Scott, an enslaved man, tried to sue for his freedom, along with the freedom of his wife and two children (Konkoly, 2006-a). However, the Court ruled that blacks were not citizens under the United States Constitution and, therefore, could not sue (Konkoly, 2006-a). In a similar case of racial injustice, Fred Korematsu, a Japanese-American man, was arrested and convicted for refusing to leave his home and enter an internment camp during World War II (Konkoly, 2006-b). Though Korematsu later appealed his conviction, the Supreme Court upheld it in a vote of 6-3 (Konkoly, 2006-b). Close analysis of the assenting and dissenting opinions in Dred Scott v. Sandford and Korematsu v. United States suggests that racism played a major role in the Supreme Court’s final rulings. This is significant because the rulings not only stripped the plaintiffs of their citizenship and civil liberties, but also revealed that the highest Court in the land is capable of egregious errors in judgment, particularly …show more content…

In fact, Dred Scott v. Sandford and Korematsu v. United States serve as terrifying reminders that the Court does not always get it “right.” Sometimes, Supreme Court Justices make decisions that hurt the very people they are sworn to protect. In Dred Scott v. Sandford, for instance, the Court not only rejected black citizenship, but also preserved slavery. Similarly, the Supreme Court condoned the persecution and imprisonment of its Japanese-American community. One can only hope the Supreme Court has learned from its mistakes, that it has developed strategies to prevent its members’ personal biases from obstructing justice, particularly when it comes to

Open Document