Good Essay About Dred Scott Vs. Sandford Case Brief

As the war against slavery took center stage in the US, the line of demarcation between proslavery and antislavery had been drawn with the Northerners and the Southerners taking a divergent view of the act. While many States had officially abolished slavery due to its evil and anti-human acts, certain states had legalized the act. The Missouri compromise left was tactically meant for the power balance between the North and the South. Missouri was admitted as a state that legalized slavery while other Illinois abolished the slavery and the slave trade. In the Dred Scott case, he had sued his master for holding as a slave in a slave free state. Dred Scott had been sold to a master who lived in a slave free state. In a bid to seek for freedom, he took the matter to the Supreme Court hoping to be declared free and the act by his master declared unconstitutional taking into account that slavery had been outlawed in the state. The matter came before Justice Roger Taney, who covertly was in support of slavery.
The case remains in the history as one of the antihuman decisions ever made in the corridors of justice. In the view of Roger Taney, slaves were properties and did not have any right to sue their masters regardless of the abolition of the slavery in the state. Taney had interpreted the constitution as not incorporating the Blacks since they were not US citizens and were never to become at any point. As a result, he declared the case unconstitutional. In reference to the independence declaration that granted equality to all men, Taney asserted that African slaves were never part of the framers of the declaration had no right to it. He thus declared them the properties of the owners and was viable for any profitable venture whenever deemed appropriate.