Dred Scott V. Sandford Case Analysis

Dred Scott was a slave in Missouri who lived in the free state of Illinois from 1833 to 1843. He later returned to Missouri and sued the Missouri courts for his freedom in 1846. His argument with state courts was that because he lived in a free state, he was a free man. This was unsuccessful and the case was appealed . Scott then brought his case to the federal courts. Unfortunately the verdict was the same and it was ruled that Scott was still considered a slave in the state of Missouri. Scott appealed his case several times and it was brought all the way up to the Supreme Court. The lower court verdicts ruled that Scott, even having lived in a free state for almost 10 years, was still considered a slave in the state of Missouri. The outrage from Scott and his defense led to an appeal to a higher court , but just like before the verdict remained the same and Scott was not granted his freedom. The appeals continued leading to the Supreme Court case of Dred Scott vs. Sandford in 1853. The arguments for and against on both sides stayed the same in this racially fueled trial. It took the court nearly a full year to go over all of the facts and come to a decision. Almost all of the Supreme Court Justices involved in the trial were for slavery and this posed an enormous threat to Scott’s …show more content…
For most of the southern states the decision seemed far and was the outcome most of them had hoped for. For the free states protestors deemed the decision unjust and wrong. It was seen as unconstitutional and to this day the Dred Scott vs. Sandford decision is seen as one of the worst Supreme Court displays in history. It showed just how incredibly racist the United States were and what an almost impossible task it was for freed slaves to really have their freedom. Also the protests began several early civil rights movements in the south in an attempt to end

Show More