What was the Dred Scott case about and what did the courts decide?
Dred Scott and his family had lived for a significant time in “free” territory, which should have automatically guaranteed their right to emancipation under the “once free, always free” doctrine. Unfortunately, Scott didn’t attempt to exercise this option until he and his family were living in Missouri, a slave-holding state. Scott attempted to purchase his family’s freedom for $300, but Irene Emerson refused the offer, so Scott sued for their freedom in court, a strategy that had worked for certain other former slaves.
Taney ,a staunch supporter of slavery and intent on protecting southerners from northern aggression wrote in the Court’s majority opinion that, because Scott was black, he was not a citizen and therefore had no right to sue. The framers of the Constitution, he wrote, believed that blacks “had no rights which the white man was bound to respect, and that the negro might justly and lawfully be reduced to slavery for his benefit. He was bought and sold and treated as an ordinary article of merchandise and traffic, whenever profit could be made by it.”
Referring to the Declaration of Independence that includes the phrase, “all men are created equal,” Taney reasoned that “it is too clear for dispute, that the enslaved African race were not intended to be included, and formed no part of the people who framed and adopted this declaration. . . .”. Frederick Douglass, found a bright side to the decision and announced, “my hopes were never brighter than now.” For Douglass, the decision would bring slavery to the attention of the nation and was a step toward slavery’s ultimate destruction.



