Landmark Supreme Court Case · Slavery and citizenship
Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857)
- Decided
- 1857
- Vote
- 7–2
- Opinion
- Chief Justice Roger B. Taney
- Constitutional provisions
Facts of the case
Dred Scott was enslaved by an army surgeon, John Emerson, who took him to live for years in the free state of Illinois and in the Wisconsin Territory, where the Missouri Compromise banned slavery. After returning to Missouri, Scott sued for his freedom, arguing that residence on free soil had made him free.
The constitutional question
Could an enslaved person, or any person of African descent, be a U.S. citizen able to sue in federal court? Could Congress ban slavery in the territories?
The decision
The Court ruled that people of African descent, whether enslaved or free, were not citizens and could not sue in federal court. It also held that Congress had no power to ban slavery in the territories, so the Missouri Compromise was unconstitutional. Taking away enslavers' "property" without due process violated the Fifth Amendment.
The Court's reasoning
Taney argued that the Framers had not considered Black people part of "the people" of the United States. He treated enslaved people as property protected by the Fifth Amendment.
Why it matters
It is widely considered the worst decision in the Court's history. It was only the second time the Court struck down a federal law. Rather than settling the slavery question, it inflamed sectional conflict and helped bring on the Civil War. The 13th Amendment (abolishing slavery) and the 14th Amendment (birthright citizenship) overturned it.