Equality And Freedom In America

1370 Words3 Pages

The United States was built on two fundamental values: equality and freedom. These two values have influenced every action of the leaders of the young nation. Equality is the virtue by which every person has the exact same opportunities and rights as their neighbor. Freedom is the ability to act as one wants, as long as those actions are not detrimental to others. While these values of equality and freedom have been pursued throughout American history, several Supreme Court cases had limited the development of equality so the United States has still not come to reaching actual equality and freedom to all. The Founding Fathers desired to reach equality in America. For example, the Declaration of Independence writes in the opening sentence, …show more content…

“Most of the American states, in the aftermath of the Revolution, had incorporated into their constitutions bills of rights enumerating the fundamental rights of their citizens in order to erect those protections to liberty” (Beema 343). The Bill of Rights was not originally a part of the Constitution, but after many states created their own bills, the government had to create a Bill of Rights to federally protect an individual’s liberties. While the Bill of Rights was designed to give individuals non- negotiable rights, these rights were very often taken away. For example, the Sedition and Espionage Acts during World War I prohibited free speech by many of the dissenters. The Sedition and Espionage Acts eliminated the freedom of speech for many citizens. This is just one case where the government took away civil freedoms during wartime. There have been countless other times were the freedoms given to the people were taken …show more content…

They used that citizen status of blacks during the Articles of Confederation as the precedent to declare that blacks are citizens of America. Since blacks were counted as citizens in many states during the Articles of Confederations, Justice Curtis argued that blacks remain citizens in the Constitution. Therefore, Dred Scott is a citizen and has the right to sue in the Supreme Court for his freedom. Another facet of the dissenting opinion was once a slave is free, the slave remains free for life. Justice Curtis and Justice McLean argued because Dred Scott went to Illinois, and was legally free in that territory, Dred Scott should remain free wherever he goes. While Dred Scott was in Illinois, he was treated a slave and had to do the work of a slave. “By virtue of what law is it, that a master may take his slave into a free territory, and exact from him the duties of a slave? The law of the Territory does not sanction it” (Justice McLean, Dissenting Opinion). Justice McLean declared the force work of Dred Scott in Illinois wrongful because the state laws do not support slavery, so one master should not be allowed to go against the laws of the state just to keep his slaves. Therefore, Dred Scott should have the freedom that he was denied so many times before. The dissenting opinion of the Dred Scott v Sandford case was filled with progressive ideas, but in the end, the racism of time won

Open Document