Dred Scott vs. Sandford

The Dred Scott case made a huge impact on the country leading up until the Civil War. The controversial case stated when, Dred Scott, a slave owned by John Emerson who had taken Scott to a northern free state. During this time Scott had married his wife and had two children. However, the family was taken to Missouri, a slave state, and that is when Dred Scott filed for his emancipation, since in a doctrine it said "once free, always free."

The case was sent to the federal court because of the dispute among north and south. The northern anti-slave states debated Scott should be freed under the Missouri Compromise but the souther states argued that the compromise was unconstitutional.

The Chief Justice Taney came to the conclusion of "he would not be a citizen in the sense in which that word is used in the Constitution of the United States, nor entitled to sue as such in one of its courts, nor to the privi- leges and immunities of a citizen in the other States." He also stated that slaves states no longer had to honor "once free, always free" and that congress never should have prohibited slavery in Wisconsin territory.

The courts decision was extremely disputed, as any topic related to slavery. however, Taney had really nailed it in that no slave should have ever even be seen as a citizen whether free or not. He practically said that no state should be allow to denied slavery. He was harsh in his judgement and is moral wrong for not allowing a man his freedom based on the fact that he is less of a human than a white man.

http://www.history.com/topics/black-history/dred-scott-case

http://cdn.constitutionreader.com/files/pdf/constitution/ch86.pdf