Scott argued he was a free man because he lived where slavery was illegal. He wasn't a free man for two reasons. One, Scott has no right to sue a federal government court because African Americans were not citizens. Two, Taney, said; merely living in free territory did not make an enslaved person free.
Dred Scott based his claim for freedom on the fact that his master had taken him to free states and territories.
Dred Scot's master had taken him to a free territory.
The decision started that enslaved people were property
In Dred Scott, the U.S. Supreme Court held that African Americans, whether enslaved or free, could not be American citizens and therefore had no standing to sue in federal court.
Dred Scott
Dred Scott
Dred Scott
Dred Scott based his claim for freedom on the fact that his master had taken him to free states and territories.
Dred Scott.
Dred Scot's master had taken him to a free territory.
Dred Scot's master had taken him to a free territory.
he was fighting for black freedom
The decision started that enslaved people were property
Dred Scott based his claim for freedom on the fact that his master had taken him to free states and territories.
Dred Scott
In Dred Scott, the U.S. Supreme Court held that African Americans, whether enslaved or free, could not be American citizens and therefore had no standing to sue in federal court.
American slave who sued his master for keeping him enslaved in a territory where slavery was banned under the missouri Compromise