Dred Scott V. Fugitive Slave Law

Words: 922
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 Winny v. Whitesides (1824), Rachel v. Walker (1834), and Prigg v. Pennsylvania (1842) emphasize the importance of the recognition of slaves as free people 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 of 1787, Missouri Compromise of 1820, and federal and state laws, help formulate the conclusion that Dred Scott should be rightfully subjected to equal rights obtained by other Americans. Much like Prigg v. Pennsylvania, Dred Scott was taken from a slave state to a free state. From there, both slaves were recognized as free blacks while Margaret Morgan’s master bestowed her freedom, Scott was no longer a slave as stated by the Northwest Ordinance. Ruling that the Ohio Territory prohibited slaves and slavery, Emerson willingly entered Illinois with Scott and recognized Scott as a free black. Furthermore, Scott’s marriage was recognized by Illinois, only …show more content…
Thus, this law builds upon the idea that it is only valid under the circumstances that a slave actually escapes which in this case Dred Scott did not. While he did not know of his rights, he traveled with Dr. Emerson into the free states, Illinois and Wisconsin, without any intent of escape. Therefore, Dred Scott was involuntarily brought by Dr. Emerson into territories where slavery was outlawed. Similarly, in the Prigg v. Pennsylvania case, the Fugitive Slave Law creates an easy job for commissioners to arbitrarily grab any African American who may or may not be a slave and report them. Under this law, Scott cannot be subjected to the punishments acquired by a fugitive