Dred Scott

Dred ScottDred Scott

BackgroundBackground

Scott was the slave of an Army Scott was the slave of an Army surgeon who took him from Missouri surgeon who took him from Missouri to posts in Illinois and modern day to posts in Illinois and modern day Minnesota.Minnesota.

Scott’s owner died and the man’s Scott’s owner died and the man’s widow inherited himwidow inherited him

White friends of Scott advised him in White friends of Scott advised him in 1846 to sue for his freedom on 1846 to sue for his freedom on grounds of prolonged residence in a grounds of prolonged residence in a free state and a free territoryfree state and a free territory

Supreme CourtSupreme Court

When Scott’s owner moved (with him) When Scott’s owner moved (with him) to New York his lawyers took the case to New York his lawyers took the case to federal courts citing the diverse-to federal courts citing the diverse-citizenship clause of the Constitution.citizenship clause of the Constitution. Gives federal courts jurisdiction over cases Gives federal courts jurisdiction over cases

involving citizens of different states.involving citizens of different states. 1854: Federal circuit court for Missouri 1854: Federal circuit court for Missouri

takes Scott’s casetakes Scott’s case

Does this affirm Dred Does this affirm Dred Scott’s status as a Scott’s status as a

Citizen?Citizen?

Major questions before the courtMajor questions before the court

1.1. As a black man, was Scott a citizen As a black man, was Scott a citizen with a right to sue in federal courts?with a right to sue in federal courts?

2.2. Had prolonged residence (two yrs. Had prolonged residence (two yrs. in each place) in a free state & in each place) in a free state & territory made Scott free?territory made Scott free?

3.3. Was Fort Snelling actually a free Was Fort Snelling actually a free territory? (Did congress have the territory? (Did congress have the right in 1820 to ban slavery in the right in 1820 to ban slavery in the Louisiana Purchase north of the 36-Louisiana Purchase north of the 36-30?30?

The Ruling (1857)The Ruling (1857)

The Supreme Court’s southern The Supreme Court’s southern majority ruled against Scott.majority ruled against Scott.

Why?Why?

The court initially was prepared to The court initially was prepared to avoid questions 1 & 3 by upholding avoid questions 1 & 3 by upholding precedent set by earlier courts, which precedent set by earlier courts, which deferred to state law.deferred to state law.

Instead the court decided to rule more Instead the court decided to rule more thoroughly on all aspects of the case.thoroughly on all aspects of the case.

Northern judges would not go along w/ Northern judges would not go along w/ the less thorough decision – this would the less thorough decision – this would give the appearance of geographically give the appearance of geographically divided court. (not good)divided court. (not good)

Why? Why? Chief Justice Roger B. Taney’s Chief Justice Roger B. Taney’s

Majority OpinionMajority Opinion Question 1:Question 1:

Negroes had not been a part of the Negroes had not been a part of the “sovereign people” who made the “sovereign people” who made the Constitution; they were not included in the Constitution; they were not included in the “all men” whom the Declaration of “all men” whom the Declaration of Independence proclaimed “created equal.” Independence proclaimed “created equal.”

Negroes “had for more than a century Negroes “had for more than a century before been regarded as beings of an before been regarded as beings of an inferior order . . . So far inferior, that they inferior order . . . So far inferior, that they had no rights which a white man was bound had no rights which a white man was bound to respect.” to respect.”

R.B. TaneyR.B. Taney

Question 1 cont.Question 1 cont.

Dissenting opinion (Curtis & McLean)Dissenting opinion (Curtis & McLean) Free blacks in 1788 and beyond had Free blacks in 1788 and beyond had

several legal rights:several legal rights: Hold and bequeath propertyHold and bequeath property Make contractsMake contracts Seek redress in courtsSeek redress in courts

Five of thirteen states that ratified the Five of thirteen states that ratified the Constitution allowed black men to vote Constitution allowed black men to vote and they participated in the ratification and they participated in the ratification process.process.

Question 2 (Taney)Question 2 (Taney)

Dred Scott’s time in Illinois and Fort Dred Scott’s time in Illinois and Fort Snelling did not make him free upon Snelling did not make him free upon returning to Missouri.returning to Missouri.

Curtis & McLean dissentedCurtis & McLean dissented

Question 3 (Taney)Question 3 (Taney)

Congress had never had the right to Congress had never had the right to prohibit slavery in the territories.prohibit slavery in the territories.

Article IV sec. 3 of the Constitution Article IV sec. 3 of the Constitution did not apply because “needful rules did not apply because “needful rules and regulations” are not and regulations” are not lawslaws..

The 5The 5thth Amendment protects life, Amendment protects life, liberty, and property. Slavery was liberty, and property. Slavery was not different from any other not different from any other property, therefore a ban on slavery property, therefore a ban on slavery was unconstitutional.was unconstitutional.

Question 3 (Curtis & McLean)Question 3 (Curtis & McLean)

Scott Scott waswas a free man by virtue of his extended a free man by virtue of his extended stays in free territorystays in free territory

Scott was also a citizen under the ConstitutionScott was also a citizen under the Constitution The Constitution The Constitution diddid empower Congress to empower Congress to

prohibit slavery in territories. “All needful rules prohibit slavery in territories. “All needful rules and regulations” meant exactly what it said.and regulations” meant exactly what it said. The first Congress upheld the 1787 Northwest The first Congress upheld the 1787 Northwest

Ordinance banning slavery in the Northwest Ordinance banning slavery in the Northwest Territory. Territory. Many examples pre-1820Many examples pre-1820

Became the Republican viewpoint on slaveryBecame the Republican viewpoint on slavery

EffectsEffects

Southerners thought it would crush the Southerners thought it would crush the anti-slavery movement because slavery anti-slavery movement because slavery was now the supreme law of the landwas now the supreme law of the land ““Black Republicanism is dead”Black Republicanism is dead”

Politicized the issue of slavery even morePoliticized the issue of slavery even more Republican Party effectively used the court Republican Party effectively used the court

decision as a propaganda tooldecision as a propaganda tool The Republican party gained support and The Republican party gained support and

momentummomentum Lincoln elected president in next election - Lincoln elected president in next election -

18601860