Dred Scott V. Sandford
Date: 1857
Case Background:
Dr. John Emerson, a U.S. Army surgeon, was the owner of Dred Scott, who was a slave. Emerson eventually moved to a base in the Wisconsin Territory and brought Scott along with him. Slavery was banned in the territory due to the Missouri Compromise. Scott lived in the area for the next three years and hired himself out for work while Emerson was away. Dred Scott then created a family and moved to Louisiana and then St. Louis with Emerson. Emerson then died and left Scott to his wife. After years of labor Scott sought to by his freedom but Sanford, Emerson's wife, did not allow him to. Issue: Dred Scott sued Sanford in the state court and argued that he was legally free because he and his family had lived in territory where slavery was banned. The state court declared Scott free but his wages were withheld during the case. John Sanford, the brother of Mrs. Emerson, was not willing to pay Scott his earned wages. Decision: The Supreme Court ruled that Americans of African decent, no matter if they were free or slaves, could not sue in federal court. It was also decided that the Court did not have the power to ban slavery in the U.S. territories. The court also decided that Scott's status as a citizen of a free state did not necessarily give him status as a U.S. citizen. Impact: The decision added to rising sectional tensions between the North and South. Although the Missouri Compromise had already been repealed, the decision validated the Southern version of national power, making the nation seem pro-slavery. |
Justice: Roger B. Taney
|