Dred+Scott+Decision

For your assigned topic, provide the following information... 1. When did it happen? 2. Provide relevant background to the event. 3. Who were the key people involved - and what were their roles? 4. Provide a one-paragraph summary of the important elements of this event/topic. 5. Identify and describe any/all key terms associated with this event/topic. 6. Explain the significance of the event - especially as it relates to worsening relationship between the North and South.

Roger Taney- Chief Justices of Maryland; declared that slaves were not considered citizens and had no power in law; in favor of slavery John Sanford- caused the courts to reverse their initial decision Stephen A. Douglass- persued a pro slavery agenda || Law of the Land- The power of the Supreme Court to establish Equal Suffrage Amendment- Equal suffrage for free African Americans || Shawn B. Sam Q. Rachael F. Kristen R. Chief Justic Roger Taney - Supreme Court justice ||
 * **Dred Scott Decision** ||
 * **Question** || **Answer** ||
 * 1. || March 6, 1857 ||
 * 2. || Dred-scott was a slave for an army surgeon. He moved to missouri(which was a free state), and when the surgeon died he sued the widow of the master for freedom, on the grounds that he lived in a free territory. The court declared Dred-scott free. John Sanford(the brother of the surgeon), claimed ownership of Scott and appealed the courts decision. Therefore, the decision of the court was reversed. Dred-scott went back to court to fight the reversal of the ruling, and the court declared that the decision could not be changed because he was not considered a citizen. ||
 * 3. || James Buchanan- he pressured several nothern justices to vote in favor of the south
 * 4. || in 1857, the Sumpreme Court established that all Blacks could not be considered citizens of the United States. The Court of the United States also declared the Missouri Compromise Unconstitutional. 5 of the 6 judges that voted in the majority were pro slavery. Taney decided that because Scott was Black, he was not considered a citizen and therefore had no right to sue. ||
 * 5. || Wisconson territory- a free territory by the Missouri Compromise line
 * 6. || This event showed that the Missouri Compromise was unconstitutional and not all men are infact, created equal. Taney argued that African Americans were not included in the "All men are created equal" statment. The verdict of the court was considered a diabolical act in favor of slavery. ||
 * **Dred Scott Decision** ||
 * **Question** || **Answer** ||
 * 1. || March 6, 1857 ||
 * 2. || Dred Scott was born a slave in Virginia, in 1818 moved to Alabama with his master, then eventually to St. Louis. In 1846, Dred Scott and his family moved to Wisconsin and since it was technically a free territory, they thought they deserved freedom, and sued for it. ||
 * 3. || Dred Scott - A slave born in Virginia, and eventually moved to Wisconsin territory, where he declared freedom.
 * 4. || Eleven years after the Scott family sued for freedom, the Supreme Court finally ruled on the case. On March 6, 1857, Cheif Justice Taney gave the majority decision of the court. First, the court ruled that Dred Scott could not claim that he could not claim constituational rights because, he was not a citizen. Second, the laws in Missouri, which was his home state, determined his status, free or slave, and his travels in free areas. Third, it said Commerce could not prohibit slavery in the terrirtories. They declared the Missouri Compromise unconstitutional. ||
 * 5. || No key terms ||
 * 6. || It declared the Missouri Compromise unconstitutional, Taney's ruling also said that since slave owners could take their property anywhere, Congress could not ban slavery from the territories. Also, since Dred Scott was black, and still technically "property", he could not bring a law suit in Court.

Erin D. Mike P. Nick G. ||

James Buchanan- Incoming president, case happened 2 days after John Emerson- Owner of Dred Scott Chief Justice Roger B. Taney- Dismissed Scott's case || Kaitlyn W., Micah F., Mustafa R., Erika M. K-Dubz ^
 * **Dred Scott Decision** ||
 * || **Answer** ||
 * 1. || It started in 1847. The decision was delivered on March 6, 1857. ||
 * 2. || Dred Scott was a Missouri slave that was taken to Illinois and Wisconsin by his owner where slavery was forbidden. The Supreme Court was very divided on their decision. The case was dismissed. ||
 * 3. || Dred Scott- Plantiff slave, sued owner's widow for his freedom, lived in Illinois and Wisconsin territory
 * 4. || Dred Scott sued John Emerson's widow for freedom because he claimed to be living in Illinois and the Wisconsin territory. The decision was handed down on March 6, 1857. The case was dismissed. The Supreme Court said that black people were not citizens of the U.S. This means that he was not able to sue Emerson's widow. They established that Scott's residence in the Wisconsin territory did not mean it was free because Congress couldn't abolish slavery in territories. ||
 * 5. || Property vs. humanity = argument of whether or not a slave was property of their owner ||
 * 6. || This case angered blacks, abolitionists and popular sovereignty supporters. The Republicans responded to the decision by saying the court's rule was an "opinion" so it should not be enforced. The southern democrats were angry with the northerns because they defied the Supreme Court. They also revisited their succession discussions. ||