Dred Scott Decision was an important ruling by the Supreme Court of the United States on the issue of slavery. The case, called Dred Scott v. Sanford, was decided in 1857. It declared that no Black person—free or enslaved—could claim United States citizenship. It also stated that Congress could not prohibit slavery in United States territories.
The ruling aroused angry resentment in the North and led the nation a step closer to civil war. It also influenced the introduction and passage of the 13th and 14th amendments to the U.S. Constitution, as well as the Civil Rights Act of 1866. The 13th Amendment abolished slavery. The 14th Amendment and the Civil Rights Act of 1866 granted full civil rights and citizenship to African Americans.
The background of the case.
Dred Scott served as the slave of a U.S. Army surgeon, John Emerson of Missouri, a state that permitted slavery. In 1834, Scott went with Emerson to live in Illinois, which prohibited slavery. They later lived in the Wisconsin Territory, where slavery was forbidden by the Missouri Compromise. In 1838, Scott returned to Missouri with Emerson. Emerson died there in 1843, and three years later Scott sued the surgeon’s widow for his freedom. 
Scott based his suit on the argument that his former residence in a free state and a free territory—Illinois and Wisconsin—made him a free man. A state circuit court ruled in Scott’s favor, but the Missouri Supreme Court later reversed the decision. Meanwhile, Scott had become legally regarded as the property of John F. A. Sanford (spelled Sandford in the U.S. Supreme Court records) of New York. Because Sanford did not live in Missouri, Scott’s lawyers were able to transfer the case to a federal court. This court ruled against Scott, and his lawyers then took the case to the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court ruling.
By a majority of 7 to 2, the Supreme Court ruled that Scott could not bring a suit in a federal court. Chief Justice Roger B. Taney, speaking for the majority, declared that Scott could not do so because Black people were not U.S. citizens.
The court could have simply dismissed the case after ruling on Scott’s citizenship. But there was a growing national desire for a ruling on the constitutionality of such laws as the Missouri Compromise. Therefore, the court discussed this issue as part of its decision in the Dred Scott case. By a smaller majority, it ruled that the Missouri Compromise, which had been repealed in 1854, was unconstitutional. Taney argued that because enslaved people were property, Congress could not forbid slavery in the territories without violating a slaveowner’s constitutional right to own property.
Dred Scott himself was sold shortly afterward. His new owner gave him his freedom two months after the Supreme Court decision.
See also Missouri Compromise; Scott, Dred; Taney, Roger B..
