Resources
- Dred Scott, Plaintiff in Error, v. John F.A. SandordComplete court transcript of the Dred Scott case.
- Dred Scott: BiographyDred Scott was a slave and social activist who served several masters before suing for his freedom. His case made it to the Supreme Court (Dred Scott v. Sandford) prior to the American Civil War.
- Dred Scott CaseThe Dred Scott case, also known as Dred Scott v. Sandford, was a decade-long fight for freedom by a Black enslaved man named Dred Scott.
- Dred Scott v. Sandford: Primary Documents in American HistoryThe Supreme Court decision Dred Scott v. Sandford was issued on March 6, 1857. Delivered by Chief Justice Roger Taney, this opinion declared that African Americans were not citizens of the United States and could not sue in Federal courts. Furthermore, this decision declared that the Missouri Compromise was unconstitutional and that Congress did not have the authority to prohibit slavery in the territories. The Dred Scott decision was overturned by the 13th and 14th Amendments to the Constitution.
The Dred Scott Decision: Crash Course Black American History
In this video, we'll learn about the US Supreme Court decision in Scott vs Sanford, handed down in 1857. The case ultimately rejected the idea that Black people could be citizens of the United States, and this helped entrench the institution of slavery, denied a host of rights to a huge number of people (both enslaved and free), and increased the tensions between abolitionists and enslavers.
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9VffLWl8asY&list=PL8dPuuaLjXtNYJO8JWpXO2JP0ezgxsrJJ&index=17
Perspectives
Dred Scott and the Problem of Constitutional Evil
Dred Scott and the Problem of Constitutional Evil concerns what is entailed by pledging allegiance to a constitutional text and tradition saturated with concessions to evil. The Constitution of the United States was originally understood as an effort to mediate controversies between persons who disputed fundamental values, and did not offer a vision of the good society. In order to form a "more perfect union" with slaveholders, late-eighteenth-century citizens fashioned a constitution that plainly compelled some injustices and was silent or ambiguous on other questions of fundamental right. This constitutional relationship could survive only as long as a bisectional consensus was required to resolve all constitutional questions not settled in 1787. Dred Scott challenges persons committed to human freedom to determine whether antislavery northerners should have provided more accommodations for slavery than were constitutionally strictly necessary or risked the enormous destruction of life and property that preceded Lincoln's new birth of freedom.
Dred Scott V. Sandford
Perhaps no other Supreme Court decision has had the political impact of Dred Scott v. Sandford. Using a variety of documents that reflect regional opinions and political debates, Paul Finkelman examines the 1857 decision that helped set in motion the events that eventually led to a new birth of freedom and the abolition of slavery in the United States.
Dred Scott Decision
The requirement that judges restrain their personal feelings and prevent outside factors from influencing their judicial decisions can be traced back to English common law. This practice is known as judicial restraint, and the abandonment of this essential principle is at the heart of a controversial case known as The Dred Scott Decision.
Source: Kanopy