Dred Scott vs. Sandford

Dred Scott vs Sandford

Slave Dred Scott sued his master because his master moved from slave territory to free territory. The Supreme Court ruled against Dred Scott, saying people have the right to control their property, which meant slavery could be allowed even in the northern free states. The court ruled against him in a 7-2 vote majority.

State level court decision

The Missouri court ruled against Dred Scott.

Supreme Court decision

The Supreme Court ruled against Dred Scott saying that the Constitution didn't intend for slaves to be freed and that the Missouri Compromise was unconstitutional.

Dred Scott

A black slave, had lived with his master for 5 years in Illinois and Wisconsin Territory. Backed by interested abolitionists, he sued for freedom on the basis of his long residence on free soil. The ruling on the case was that He was a black slave and not a citizen, so he had no rights.

John F. A. Sanford

A slave owner. Dred Scott filed a case against him claiming that he was free.

Majority opinion

Dred Scott is still a slave

Dissenting opinion

Dred Scott should be freed.