LAD #18: Dred Scott Decision

       As the appealed case of Dred Scott v. Sanford came to an end, Chief Justice Taney sided with Sanford. Scott, a slave and the son of immigrants, was decided as not a legal citizen of the United States and therefore was not guaranteed the rights each citizens are given in the Constitution. Taney saw no distinction between Scott and other forms of property, so technically Scott never could have claimed his rights had been violated. And more disturbingly, Scott was not allowed to sue in State or Federal Courts. Sanford, as the owner and a citizen of the United States, was entitled these rights under the Constitution as the government cannot interfere with a citizen's property. As a result, the court had to ensure Sanford's ownership over Scott. This essentially discarded the Missouri Compromise, as now it seemed that the line established held no more power. Scott had entered the free state of Illinois and was still considered property, and in turn could not sue as he did not have the right. In the end, Taney found that the Compromise was unconstitutional.