Dred Scott vs Sanford

In Glogpedia

by spwptjtqj
Last updated 6 years ago

Social Studies
American History

Toggle fullscreen Print glog
Dred Scott vs Sanford

John F. A. SanfordJohn F. A. Sanford was the brother of Mrs. Emerson and the one that Dred Scott sued for his freedom. Sanford was from Virgnia until he moved to St. Louis and worked under William Clark. He only owned Scott for a brief time before Scott sued him for his freedom.

Dred Scott vs Sanford 1857

Dred Scott arguements: Dred Scott's major arguements was that once his master took him into a free territory he should have been free from servitude under state and federal law.

John F. A. Sanford arguements: Sanford's major arguements was that it was breaking the 5th amendment to take away his property (Dred Scott) without due process or just compensation. Due to this no master could be stripped of his property rights could be limited or taken away by state or federal law.

Major Arguements

More about Dred Scott and the case

Lasting Impact

The decision of the Dred Scott case was massive. It increased the tension between the North and South and even declared that the Missouri Compromise of 1820 was unconstitutional saying that congress did not have the power to control slavery. This was a major event that lead to the events of the Civil War.

Dred Scott BioDred Scott was born into slavery in Virginia. Him and his parents were all owned by Peter Blow and his family. When Peter Blow died Scott was sold to a US Army doctor named John Emerson. Later Emerson moved to the Illinois and Wisconsin territories which were both free. When Emerson died Scott decided to buy his families freedom but the Emerson widow refused the payment. Emerson's wife later gave Scott and his family to her brother John F. A. Sanford. This is when Scott decieded to sue for his freedom.

Dred Scott

John F. A. Sanford

Chief Justice Roger B. TaneyHe is the Justice who wrote the opinion in the Dred Scott case.

7 justices voted against Scott. (Taney, Campbell, Catron, Daniel, Grier, Nelson, Wayne) 2 justices voted for Scott. (Curtis, Mclean

CitationConstitutional Law for a Changing America. 2nd ed. Washington, D.C.: CQ, 1995. Print.http://www.infoplease.com/us/supreme-court/cases/ar09.htmlhttp://www.carolyar.com/bioJohnFASanford.htmhttp://www.biography.com/people/dred-scott-9477240

Dissenting OpinionsMcLean and Curtis were the ones who had dissenting opinions on the decsion. McLean dissented with the claim that black could not be citizens. He also said that during the ratification of the constitution blacks could vote in 5 of the 13 states. Curtis dissented on the claim that the court decided that they did not have the jursisdiction to hear Scott's case.


    There are no comments for this Glog.