Dred Scott Case

Also found in: Legal.

Dred Scott Case,

argued before the U.S. Supreme Court in 1856–57. It involved the then bitterly contested issue of the status of slavery in the federal territories. In 1834, Dred Scott, a black slave, personal servant to Dr. John Emerson, a U.S. army surgeon, was taken by his master from Missouri, a slave state, to Illinois, a free state, and thence to Fort Snelling (now in Minnesota) in Wisconsin Territory, where slavery was prohibited by the Missouri CompromiseMissouri Compromise,
1820–21, measures passed by the U.S. Congress to end the first of a series of crises concerning the extension of slavery.

By 1818, Missouri Territory had gained sufficient population to warrant its admission into the Union as a state.
..... Click the link for more information.
. There he married before returning with Dr. Emerson to Missouri in 1838. After Emerson's death, Scott sued (1846) Emerson's widow for freedom for himself and his family (he had two children) on the ground that residence in a free state and then in a free territory had ended his bondage. He won his suit before a lower court in St. Louis, but the Missouri supreme court reversed the decision (thus reversing its own precedents). Scott's lawyers then maneuvered the case into the federal courts. Since J. F. A. Sanford, Mrs. Emerson's brother, was the legal administrator of her property and a resident of New York, the federal court accepted jurisdiction for the case on the basis of diversity of state citizenship. After a federal district court decided against Scott, the case came on appeal to the Supreme Court. In Feb., 1857, the court decided in conference to avoid completely the question of the constitutionality of the Missouri Compromise and to rule against Scott on the ground that under Missouri law as now interpreted by the supreme court of that state he remained a slave despite his previous residence in free territory. However, when it became known that two antislavery justices, John McLean and Benjamin R. Curtis, planned to write dissenting opinions vigorously upholding the constitutionality of the Missouri Compromise (which had, in fact, been voided by the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854), the court's Southern members, constituting the majority, decided to consider the whole question of federal power over slavery in the territories. They decided in the case of Scott v. Sandford (the name was misspelled in the formal reports) that Congress had no power to prohibit slavery in the territories, and Chief Justice Roger B. TaneyTaney, Roger Brooke
, 1777–1864, American jurist, 5th chief justice of the United States (1836–64), b. Calvert co., Md., grad. Dickinson College, 1795. Early Life

Taney was born of a wealthy slave-owning family of tobacco farmers.
..... Click the link for more information.
 delivered the court's opinion that the Missouri Compromise was unconstitutional. Three of the justices also held that a black "whose ancestors were … sold as slaves" was not entitled to the rights of a federal citizen and therefore had no standing in court. The court's verdict further inflamed the sectional controversy between North and South and was roundly denounced by the growing antislavery group in the North.


See V. C. Hopkins, Dred Scott's Case (1951, repr. 1967); S. I. Kutler, ed., The Dred Scott Decision (1967); F. B. Latham, The Dred Scott Decision (1968).

The Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia™ Copyright © 2013, Columbia University Press. Licensed from Columbia University Press. All rights reserved. www.cc.columbia.edu/cu/cup/
References in periodicals archive ?
Even before Minnesota became a state, facts in the territory gave rise to the infamous Dred Scott case.60 U.S.
Wade abortion case and the 1857 Dred Scott case that held that African-Americans were not citizens.
and allow members of the bar to earn three continuing-legal-education credits.<br />The National Judicial College sponsored and organized the symposium, which will feature a morning panel discussion in which descendants of the major players in the Dred Scott case will speak on the significance of that case in society and their own lives.<br />Those panelists include Lynne Jackson, great-great-granddaughter of Dred and Harriet Scott; Kate Taney Billingsley, descendant of U.S.
They explore the history and legal consequences of the act and competing impulses within it, including the narrowing of citizenship in the Civil War era, how the Thirteenth Amendment operated to overturn the Dred Scott case, and Section 9, which allows the president to use the nation's military in the actAEs enforcement; New England's role in the passage of the act and how the act operated in Kentucky, Missouri, and South Carolina during Reconstruction; and its interpretation and use, in terms of contract rights, interpretation by the Supreme Court in its first decades, in the context of the post-World War II civil rights era and affirmative action, and how the act looks backward toward slavery and forward to the Reconstruction, the Fourteenth Amendment, and the civil rights movement.
Both the author's justification for covering the ruling and his strategies for crafting coverage for a diverse audience play out in this article, entitled "The Dred Scott Case." The unnamed author, whose piece thus represents the periodical and not just himself, begins the article by claiming that the only sources available were "one or two of the dissenting opinions [that] have leaked out somewhat irregularly" ("The Dred Scott Case" 193).
And so much for the Supreme Court opinion in the infamous Dred Scott case that if a slave or former slave were recognized as a citizen, "It would give to persons of the negro race, who were recognized as citizens in any one State of the Union, the right ...
Louis in 1946, a century after the landmark Dred Scott case.
VanderVelde puts the Dred Scott case into context--she shows that the Scott family's claim was one of many claims made by people who believed they were free.
Louis, where the Dred Scott case was tried, the cause of racial tolerance seemed to be looking up last week.
It was while he was shooting the 2014 comedy A Million Ways To Die In The West and reading about the American Civil War that he came across the Dred Scott case, about a slave who unsuccessfully sued for his freedom.
Supreme Court) proclaimed that "these negroes are not slaves, but are kidnapped Africans, who, by the laws of Spain itself, are entitled to their freedom, and were kidnapped and illegally carried to Cuba, and illegally detained and restrained on board the Amistad." Interestingly, Chief Justice Roger Taney--who later ruled in the Dred Scott case that a black man, even a free black man, can never have access to federal courts--signed on to Story's opinion in the Amistad case granting the Africans their day in court, a court that included full jury trial.
Contributors offer fresh interpretations of Buchanan's actions and policies related to the secession crisis, the Dred Scott case, the Brigham Young situation, and foreign relations.