Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857)

In 1854, a slave by the name of Dred Scott sued his master for the rights to his freedom. Scott claimed his master had brought him from the slave state of Missouri to the free territory of Wisconsin and the free state Illinois, before moving back to Missouri. Because his master had moved into free territory, Scott argued that he was no longer enslaved and should gain his freedom. When the federal court ruled against him however, Scott appealed to the Supreme Court. Finally, on March 6th 1857, the Supreme Court ruled against Scott. Chief Justice Robert Taney, who had written the Court’s decision, ruled that because Scott was a slave, he was not a citizen and had no rights to sue in a United States court. Additionally, Taney said that by banning slavery Congress was actually taking away property, a direct violation of the 5th amendment (Guarantees the right not to be deprived of property without due process of law). On that account, all congressional efforts to ban slavery in the territories were prohibited.
Justices John Mclean and Benjamin Curtis both strongly dissented on both points. They showed that the U.S. Constitution and other laws had recognized African Americans as citizens. Taney’s opinion in Dred Scott legally greatly expanded the reach of slavery, and politically heightened the tensions between the North and South.
In the end, it took five years of civil war to find if Taney’s opinion would be the law. Immediately after the war however, the federal government abolished slavery with the Thirteenth Amendment and then extended state and national citizenship with the Fourteenth Amendment to "all persons born or naturalized in the United States." Taney's opinion went on to be considered one of the worst decisions ever by the Supreme court, and the case could never be used as a precedent.

By Kiki G, Matt M