Dred Scott Case Analysis

Words: 927
Pages: 4

Based on the rulings established by previous court cases and various federal laws, the enslavement of Dred Scott cannot be justified. Court cases such as Prigg v. Pennsylvania and Winny v. Whitesides emphasize the importance of the recognition of slaves as free citizens after they are brought into anti-slavery territories. Not only do these court cases support Dred Scott’s innocence and freedom, but the subsequent laws also further enforce the idea that Scott is a citizen. The Northwest Ordinance, Mason-Dixon Line, Missouri Compromise, and federal and state laws, help formulate the conclusion that Dred Scott should be rightfully subjected to equal rights obtained by other citizens of the United States. Much like Prigg v. Pennsylvania, Dred Scott was taken from a slave state to a free state. …show more content…
The Missouri Compromise in 1820 declares slavery is prohibited above the 36° 30’ North Latitude Line, and the Northwest Ordinance forbids slavery in the Wisconsin Territory. Although the Property Clause can be argued that it makes the Missouri Compromise unconstitutional because it only affects lands at the time of ratification, the Northwest Ordinance was accepted before the ratification, therefore it still holds the prohibition of slavery in the Wisconsin Territory. This correlates with the 1824 Winny v. Whitesides court case where Winny, a slave, was taken to the Northwest Territory, but through the Missouri Compromise and Northwest Ordinance, was declared a citizen. Because in the Winny v. Whitesides, it was declared that slaves must be free once in a free state, this grants Scott the freedom and rights as a citizen. Also seen in another court case Rachel v. Walker, it was declared that owning a slave when entering into a free state was against the law. Therefore through these rights, Scott is able to certify his