THE CASE: Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857)
Step I: Read the background of the case found at the right. After reading discuss the following:
|
Background of the Case:
Dred Scott was born into slavery in 1799 in Virginia. In 1832, army surgeon Dr. John Emerson purchased Scott and eventually took him to Illinois, a free state, and then to Fort Snelling in Wisconsin Territory where the Missouri Compromise had outlawed slavery. (Look at the image below to understand the Missouri Compromise passed by the U.S. Congress before you continue reading) In 1837, Emerson moved to Louisiana, a slave state, where he met and married Eliza (Irene) Sandford. John Emerson died suddenly in 1843, and his enslaved workers became Irene’s property. Scott tried multiple times to purchase his freedom from Irene, but she refused.
In 1846, Dred and his wife Harriet filed separate lawsuits for freedom in the St. Louis Circuit Court against Irene Sandford based on two Missouri statutes (state laws). One statute allowed any person of any color to sue for wrongful enslavement. The other stated that any person taken to a free territory automatically became free and could not be re-enslaved upon returning to a slave state. Neither Dred nor Harriet Scott could read or write, but they received support from their church, abolitionists and an unlikely source, a former family who had once owned them. In 1850 the Scott’s won their freedom in court. However, Irene appealed the case to the Missouri Supreme Court which REVERSED the lower court’s decision, making Dred Scott and his family enslaved again. Scott then lost an appeal in federal court at the U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Missouri, keeping Scott and his in slavery. In 1854, Scott appealed his case to the United States Supreme Court. The trial began on February 11, 1856. |
Step II: Discuss the following:
|
Step III:
Watch the video to the right, it offers a bit more information about the case of Dred Scott v. Sandford. After watching the video, discuss the following questions: 1. What amendment talks about "Due Process" and protects property? 2. How many states had free African Americans who could vote when the U.S. Constitution was created? 3. What does the U.S. Constitution say in Article IV that Congress can make laws about? |
|
Step IV: Summary and Review:
In a 7-2 decision, the Supreme Court sided with John Sandford deciding that African Americans were not citizens and therefore could NOT sue in a court of law. Chief Justice Roger Taney incorrectly stated that the founding fathers believed that African Americans “had no rights which the white man was bound to respect.” Taney’s interpretation of the 5th amendments “Due Process” clause was essentially that slaves were protected property and Congress did not have the Constitutional Authority to ban slavery from the states or territories. This also overturned the “Missouri Compromise” as unconstitutional. (Even though Article IV of the U.S. Constitution stated that Congress could make laws about property)
In a dissenting opinion for the minority, Justice Benjamin Curtis noted that when the U.S. Constitution was established in 1787, there were already 5 states that had free African Americans who could vote. Curtis said, “It would be strange, if we were to find (in the U.S. Constitution) anything which deprived of their citizenship any part of the people of the United States who were among those by whom it was established.” Luckily Dred Scott and his family were purchased by a former owner’s son and finally freed in 1857. Unfortunately, Scott would not live long to enjoy his freedom, dying from tuberculosis at the age of 59 in 1858.
The Dred Scott v. Sandford case is considered by historians and legal scholars as possibly the worst decision in the history of the U.S. Supreme Court. The Scott v. Sandford case contributed to the outbreak of the U.S. Civil War in 1861, but would eventually be addressed by the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments to the U.S. Constitution.
Unfortunately, these amendments would eventually be challenged as state legislatures passed laws known as “black codes” in the south (also so known as “Jim Crow” policies) that were meant to limit the freedoms of African Americans. It would take nearly 100 years for these “Jim Crow” laws to be fixed with new amendments and federal laws. (the 24th amendment, the 1964, 1965, and 1968 Civil Rights Acts from Congress)
In a 7-2 decision, the Supreme Court sided with John Sandford deciding that African Americans were not citizens and therefore could NOT sue in a court of law. Chief Justice Roger Taney incorrectly stated that the founding fathers believed that African Americans “had no rights which the white man was bound to respect.” Taney’s interpretation of the 5th amendments “Due Process” clause was essentially that slaves were protected property and Congress did not have the Constitutional Authority to ban slavery from the states or territories. This also overturned the “Missouri Compromise” as unconstitutional. (Even though Article IV of the U.S. Constitution stated that Congress could make laws about property)
In a dissenting opinion for the minority, Justice Benjamin Curtis noted that when the U.S. Constitution was established in 1787, there were already 5 states that had free African Americans who could vote. Curtis said, “It would be strange, if we were to find (in the U.S. Constitution) anything which deprived of their citizenship any part of the people of the United States who were among those by whom it was established.” Luckily Dred Scott and his family were purchased by a former owner’s son and finally freed in 1857. Unfortunately, Scott would not live long to enjoy his freedom, dying from tuberculosis at the age of 59 in 1858.
The Dred Scott v. Sandford case is considered by historians and legal scholars as possibly the worst decision in the history of the U.S. Supreme Court. The Scott v. Sandford case contributed to the outbreak of the U.S. Civil War in 1861, but would eventually be addressed by the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments to the U.S. Constitution.
Unfortunately, these amendments would eventually be challenged as state legislatures passed laws known as “black codes” in the south (also so known as “Jim Crow” policies) that were meant to limit the freedoms of African Americans. It would take nearly 100 years for these “Jim Crow” laws to be fixed with new amendments and federal laws. (the 24th amendment, the 1964, 1965, and 1968 Civil Rights Acts from Congress)
"Black codes" or "Jim Crow" laws passed by state legislatures after the amendments above.
|
|
• A literacy test is required to vote
• A poll tax is required to vote • Registering to vote requires a white person’s approval |