LAD #18: Dred Scott Decision

http://hinterlandgazette.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/dred-scott1.png

 

LAD #18: Dred Scott Decision

 The decision opens by discussing the reason for which Chief Justice Taney had to rewrite the majority decision. It then states that President Buchanan supported the power of the Supreme Court to make this decision on the issues of slavery with regards to new territory. In Taney's decision, he first states that African-Americans are not American citizens, and therefore, Dred Scott did not even have the right to sue in court. Taney then asserts that under the Fifth Amendment, all Americans have the right to life, liberty, and property, and that therefore, in would be unconstitutional if a citizen lost his property, simply because he brought it into a new region. For this reason, he declared the Missouri Compromise unconstitutional. He also declared that Scott was not free because he filed his lawsuit in a slave state. 

 

 

http://admin.bhbl.neric.org/~mmosall/ushistory/topics/Caning%20of%20Charles%20Sumner.jpg

 

This decision reminded me of the caning of Charles Sumner and the issues in Kansas because states could now choose slave or free. This was because the Missouri Compromise was declared unconstitutional in this decision.