The Impact of the Dred Scott Case on the United States The Dred Scott Case had a huge impact on the United States as it is today. The Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments have called it the worst Supreme Court decision ever rendered and was later overturned. The Dred Scott Decision was a key case regarding the issue of slavery; the case started as a slave seeking his rightful freedom and mushroomed into a whole lot more. 65 The reason why Dred Scott decided to pursue his freedom is unknown, but there are a couple theories. For example, it is believed that “most likely, Scott decided to bring his case to court after years of [talks] with other slaves that had done the same.” (Herda, 30) This shows that, Scott was not an ignorant, uninformed man and had reason to believe he could obtain freedom for himself and his family. This also shows that he took a long look at the issue before making the decision to sue for his freedom. In addition, he may have also been convinced by “several talks with his old friends, the Blows, who were sympathetic to his troubles.” (Herda, 30) This shows that his previous owners, turned friends, the Blows, may have been a major influence; being Scott’s staunch supporters throughout his life. This also shows that the Blows encouragement, on top of other slave’s actions, may have been what finally convinced Scott to pursue the suit for his freedom. In conclusion, several factors convinced Scott to sue for his freedom including the opinion of his previous owners, the Blows. 188 It is also possible that his original lawyer Samuel Mansfield Bay saw opportunities for a large reward due to his services to Scott, and initiated litigation. For example, some feel that Bay’s “object was to pave the way for a suit against the Emerson estate for the twelve years’ wages to which Scott would be entitled to,” (Herda, 29) should he win the case. This shows that, money could have been the driving force behind this case. This also shows that Scott may have been persuadable to another person’s reasons for pursuing the case. In addition, if this was true and Scott “had been illegally held as a slave since 1834.” (Herda, 30) This shows that, he would have the right to compensation, and therefore be entitled to what would be a lot of money. This also shows, how a mistake by a master in his traveling... ... middle of paper ... ...he [lack] of jurisdiction in that court.” (SD) This shows that, Chief Justice Taney and the others had decided that finding the other court had no ability to rule as it had was all they needed to address. This also shows, how in a bias court (pro-slavery) that a decision could be tainted. In conclusion, the Supreme Court decided Dred Scott could remain a slave, and that they did not support the limiting of slavery. 225 In Conclusion, the Dred Scott Decision took a long drawn out journey through the court system to be literally, and figuratively dismissed. It addressed a subject, which was not popular, freedom for slaves, and went through several courts, without receiving any merit. While it is not a well-known case, it is on point as to the conflicts over slavery, and how they led to the Civil War. It has been considered the worst decision ever made by the Supreme Court, and for good reason. 84 Works Cited Herda, D.J. The Dred Scott Case: Slavery and Citizenship Berkeley Heights, New Jersey Enslow Publishers, 1994. Lukes, Bonnie. The Dred Scott Decision San Diego, California, Lucent Books, 1997 URL : http://www.nara.gov/exhall/originals/scott.html
How does Seward expand the antislavery argument beyond the moral appeal of the abolitionist? acknowledging his argument and appreciating his position.
At the same time in history, the Dred Scott case was taking place. This case was to determine what should be deemed appropriate for the rights of slaves. This case in particular infuriated Lincoln more than anything else did in his career. The ruling in this case was a legal way to insure that anyone that was enslaved was not only unable to become freed, but also that they were unable to be acknowledges as citizens in the United States at
Daniel Horsmanden’s Journal of the Proceedings was written with a specific purpose in mind which he openly acknowledges in his introduction. Horsmanden claims that it was for “the public benefit” (Zabin, p.46) and inspired by the fact that some individuals believed “there was no plot at all” (Zabin, p.45). He hoped that by displaying the facts of the case he could prove to the people of New York City that the proceedings were just and that there was a great need to keep close supervision on their African slaves (Zabin, p.45). Having such an obvious bias the Journal is far from a perfect historical record of events, but under close examination Horsmanden’s account gives a vast amount of insight into the sharp divisions that characterized eighteenth century New York and can help explain why the people were so ready to believe in such a grandiose conspiracy. One can even see ways in which the conspiracy brought New Yorkers together and how it drove them apart.
Jackson vs. Birmingham Board of Education (2005) is a more recent case that still fights against one of history?s most common topics; equal rights. This will always stand as one of the greatest problem factors the world will face until eternity. These issues date back for years and years. This case was brought to the Supreme Court in 2004 for a well-known topic of sexual discrimination. It helped to define the importance of Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972
In 1846, African slave Dred Scott sued for his freedom on the grounds that he resided in the free states of Illinois and the Wisconsin/Minnesota territory to serve his owner. In 1854, Scott appealed his case to the Supreme Court, seeking to reverse the District court’s decision declaring him still a slave. In 1856, the case began, however the freedom of Dred Scott was not the only issue the court addressed, they also had to decide can blacks be citizens, the constitutionality of the Missouri Compromise, and can Congress prohibit slavery in federal territories. A year later the Supreme Court handed down its decision, “they dismissed the case of due to lack of
In doing this though, he had to leave his family behind. Washington is heartbroken and returns to the United States to take his wife to freedom. He makes it back to his owners land and gets caught. He and his wife end up being chased down by the master and his dogs and his wife gets shot and killed. Washington is sold to traders on the Creole ship, where a mix of African American slaves and French slaves are kept. The slaves aboard this ship are considered to be bad slaves and whose fate is to be sold in a bad slave market. Washington was a cook on the ship, which made it easier for him to organize how to take over the vessel. With the help of eighteen others he killed a slave-trader, severely wounded the captain, and seized control of the ship. The ship had set sail for the Bahamas, where slavery was illegal. Not only did Washington free his fellow slaves that day, but rose from a slave to a captain of a
Vbansal. “The Effects of Dred Scott V. Sanford.” Associated Content. 06 August 2007. 26 May 2010.
Dred Scott v. Stanford was the most fundamental case in American history dealing with the rights of African Americans. This case tested the Missouri Compromise and challenged the issues of slavery and national citizenship. Dred Scott was a slave owned by Dr. John Emerson, who constantly traveled in and out of free and slave states with Scott. Originally Emerson had Scott in Missouri, a slave state, and then moved over to Illinois, a free state, and lastly to Wisconsin territory, also free. While in the Wisconsin territory, Scott married and had two daughters, which was unique due to the fact that slaves in the south were prohibited from being married legally, further validating Scott's implicit freedom. Eventually Emerson moves Scott and his
Dred Scott was born as a slave in Virginia. As a young man he was taken to Missouri, where he was later sold to Dr. John Emerson. A military surgeon, Dr. John Emerson moved Scott a US Army Post in the free state of Illinois. Several years later Dr. Emerson moved once again, but this time to the Wisconsin Territory. As part of the massive Louisiana Purchase the Wisconsin Territory under the Missouri Compromise prohibited slavery. While in the Wisconsin Territory and also later in St. Louis the Emersons started to rent the Scotts out as servants. Under several state and federal laws this was an illegal act in direct violation of the Missouri Compromise, the Northwest Ordinance, and the Wisconsin Enabling Act. Scott bounced around from several military posts including one in Louisiana before ending up again in St. Louis, Missouri. After the death of Dr. Emerson, ownership of the Scotts reverted to his wife. Through out 1846 Scott tried several times to by the freedom for him and his family. After several failed attempts he resorted to the legal r...
questions arise: 1st.[sic] Was [Scott], together with his family, free in Missouri by reason of his stay in the territory of the United States hereinbefore mentioned? And 2d[sic], If they were not, is Scott himself free by reason of his removal to Rock Island, in the state of Illinois...?" Both of these questions led to an even greater and more central question: "Can a negro, whose ancestors were imported into this country, and sold as slaves, become a member of the political community formed and brought into existence by the Constitution of the United States, and as such become entitled to all the rights, and priveledges, and immunities, guarantied by that instrument to the citizen?" (i.e. does Scott, having been a slave, have the constitutional right to sue?)
The case of brown v. board of education was one of the biggest turning points for African Americans to becoming accepted into white society at the time. Brown vs. Board of education to this day remains one of, if not the most important cases that African Americans have brought to the surface for the better of the United States. Brown v. Board of Education was not simply about children and education (Silent Covenants pg 11); it was about being equal in a society that claims African Americans were treated equal, when in fact they were definitely not. This case was the starting point for many Americans to realize that separate but equal did not work. The separate but equal label did not make sense either, the circumstances were clearly not separate but equal. Brown v. Board of Education brought this out, this case was the reason that blacks and whites no longer have separate restrooms and water fountains, this was the case that truly destroyed the saying separate but equal, Brown vs. Board of education truly made everyone equal.
The ultimate ruling is often referred to as the Dred Scott Decision. The Supreme Court had ruled that although people of African American descent may be free, they are not American citizens. They also ruled that slavery could not be banned in United States territories by Congress. Lastly, because slaves were considered possessions, slave-owners were protected under the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution. This de...
The Supreme Court is perhaps most well known for the Brown vs. Board of Education decision in 1954. By declaring that segregation in schools was unconstitutional, Kevern Verney says a ‘direct reversal of the Plessy … ruling’1 58 years earlier was affected. It was Plessy which gave southern states the authority to continue persecuting African-Americans for the next sixty years. The first positive aspect of Brown was was the actual integration of white and black students in schools. Unfortunately, this was not carried out to a suitable degree, with many local authorities feeling no obligation to change the status quo. The Supreme Court did issue a second ruling, the so called Brown 2, in 1955. This forwarded the idea that integration should proceed 'with all deliberate speed', but James T. Patterson tells us even by 1964 ‘only an estimated 1.2% of black children ... attended public schools with white children’2. This demonstrates that, although the Supreme Court was working for Civil Rights, it was still unable to force change. Rathbone agrees, saying the Supreme Court ‘did not do enough to ensure compliance’3. However, Patterson goes on to say that ‘the case did have some impact’4. He explains how the ruling, although often ignored, acted ‘relatively quickly in most of the boarder s...
Dred Scott was a slave. His master was an army surgeon who was based in Missouri. In the early 1830's and 1840's his master and him traveled to Illinois and the Wisconsin territory. It was in 1846 that Scott sued his master's widow for freedom. His argument was that the state of ...
As a free man in a world where blacks were either in jail or in slavery, Northup was indeed lucky. However, his fortunes turned when two men approached him and offered him substantial payment to join their travelling music show (Northup 29). Unknown to Northup, the two white men intended to drug him and sell him as a slave. They were successful and soon Northup found himself a slave despite having papers at home to prove that he was a free man. For 12 years, Northup served under a number of masters in the south, some of whom were utterly cruel and some whose humanism he admired. Eventually, he came into contact with an abolitionist who contacted his family who were then able to send a state agent to reclaim him.