Dred Scott v. Sandford

Student’s nameInstructorCourseDateDred Scott vs. Sanford Case
Dred Scott was born in Virginia, and together with his parents, they worked as slaves under Peter blow and his family. The primary root of the Scott vs. Sandford case was slavery and all Scott wanted was to acquire freedom for himself and his family.
When Scott was 25 years old, he was taken to Illinois a state where slavery was illegal according to the constitution. He argued that he lived in a territory where slavery was seen as illegal and therefore he had a right to be considered a free man. Scott then decided to sue his new employer John Sanford in the federal courts (Zee 10).
Throughout his life, Scott tried all he could to attain freedom for himself and his family through the Missouri court system, but all was in vain. When Scott took his case to court in Missouri, he won, but the final decision was annulled by the Supreme Court (Zee 11).
The Supreme Court’s ruling on the Scott vs. Sanford case declared that slaves were not rightful American citizens and therefore did not have any right to sue in a federal court. Scott case was concluded that he had no reason to sue in the federal court because he was an offspring of an imported African slave. This case resulted in the start of the civil war between the southern and the northern states of the United States (Zee 23).
The Dred Scott’s decision has a place in America’s constitution as an example of a case where the Supreme Court tried to enforce a judicial solution on a political problem.

The Scott decision was also the beginning of the abolishment journey of slavery in the United States (Zee 25).

Works Cited
Zee, Amy V. Dred Scott v. Sandford: Slavery and Freedom before the American Civil War. 2013.