activistsposts

[activistsposts]

Dred Scott v Stanford

I decided to do my multimedia project on the Dred Scott v Stanford Supreme Court case because this was a very important case that is engraved in black history and gave a reality check of what the country's situation was regarding race. Racial issues have always been very interesting to me so I wanted to learn more about this case and how it affected the civil war and the United States society.

[activistsposts]

Background information

This case occurred in 1957, a close-range time to the Civil War when slavery was a controversial topic because the north had abolitionist ideals and the south wanted to remain with slavery. Congress was in the works of trying to compromise both ideals of slave states vs free states to keep the peace. An example would be the Missouri compromise where Maine became a free state while Missouri, was a slave state. 

[activistsposts]

 Dred Scott was an African American man who was born into slavery in Virginia and moved to Missouri.  Because of Missouri Compromise, Illinois was a free state which meant slavery was prohibited in the state. When returning to Missouri, Dred Scott's owner past away, and Scott filed a lawsuit for freedom for himself and his family from his owner's wife. He filed this because while he resided in Illinois, he was in a free state that prohibited slavery so he claimed when he entered that territory, he became a free man. He lost the suit he filed because legally, he was still a slave and could not be returned to Illinois. He was then purchased by another man and Scott sued for a second time for his family's freedom. This time he would be in federal court and the court concluded that he was still a slave. The supreme court agreed to hear Dred Scott's case and this is where things get complicated...

[activistsposts]

 When the Supreme court took this case they considered two of the following, Are slaves United States citizens under the constitution? and Is the Missouri compromise constitutional? The supreme court ended up ruling that black slaves are not citizens of the United States and therefore cannot be considered free if already a slave. The Missouri compromise was ruled unconstitutional due to the fact that setting slaves free meant depriving slave owners of their property. This court case even brought up the question of whether free black people were also considered citizens.

[activistsposts]

 Because the Supreme Court did not grant freedom to Dred Scott, this meant many slaves in the south could not seek freedom or even sue in court. It allowed the expansion of slavery into the territories before lincoln stopped it.  It reminded the country that even in a political sense, Black people were not equal and pushed history back to prevent any rights to slaves or free black people. This has also set a bad reputation on the supreme court after the decision and gave more rights to slave owners. Looking at this decision now, it was definitely a step backward in history and prevented more rights for African Americans and the abolishment of slavery 

[activistsposts]

 As of today, we have come a long way since this Dred Scott case. Although we are still fighting for civil rights today,  slavery is abolished and we have improved many issues regarding race and other aspects. This supreme court case is a big part of black history and although it was not in favor of freedom, it revealed the dark side of the supreme court and how government plays a role in racial issues. This decision was very influential to the Civil war as it occurred only four years passed the supreme court decision. This decision resulted in many angry African Americans because this case revealed that Black people were not considered citizens in the country. I can understand how bad of a reputation this gave to the supreme court and why many people would be angry including abolitionists. Not only was citizenship stripped away from black people, but the chance of freedom and a compromise became unconstitutional. This was a time in the 1800s when slavery was beginning to be looked down upon and the majority of people in the north were abolitionists. People in the south heavily defended slavery so the majority of people in favor of the supreme court decision would be slave owners. Overall, this decision was very important and disappointed many abolitionists and those in favor of civil rights 

[activistsposts]

Citations:

 Ehrlich, Walter. “The Origins of the Dred Scott Case.” The Journal of Negro History, vol. 59, no. 2, 1974, pp. 132–42. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/2717325. Accessed 20 May 2022.

Cohen, Joel E. “THE DRED SCOTT DECISION: BACKGROUND AND IMPLICATIONS.” Negro History Bulletin, vol. 26, no. 4, 1963, pp. 145–55. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/44202014. Accessed 20 May 2022.

Hudson, Gossie Harold. “Black Americans vs. Citizenship: The Dred Scott Decision.” Negro History Bulletin, vol. 46, no. 1, 1983, pp. 26–28. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/44254727. Accessed 20 May 2022.

Hodder, F. H. “Some Phases of the Dred Scott Case.” The Mississippi Valley Historical Review, vol. 16, no. 1, 1929, pp. 3–22. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/1898525. Accessed 20 May 2022.

Vishneski, John S. “What the Court Decided in Dred Scott v. Sandford.” The American Journal of Legal History, vol. 32, no. 4, 1988, pp. 373–90. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/845743. Accessed 20 May 2022.

Stenberg, Richard R. “Some Political Aspects of the Dred Scott Case.” The Mississippi Valley Historical Review, vol. 19, no. 4, 1933, pp. 571–77. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/1897809. Accessed 20 May 2022.