Scott v. Stanford: A Decision That Would Change the Future “You don’t have to know a lot of things for your life to make a lasting difference in the world. But you do have to know the few great things that matter, perhaps just one, and then be willing to live for them and die for them. The people that make a durable difference in the world are not the people who have mastered many things, but who have been mastered by one great thing.” This quote was said by John Piper, a well-known preacher and author. Piper gave people hope, just like Dred Scott. Scott survived the herculean battle on the road to freedom. He pled for his family’s withdraw from slavery; however, in the end, he ended up suing his master in a case that traveled all the …show more content…
Blow was a man who owned a large and very successful plantation. As Scott grew up, Blow used him as a general handyman. He worked as a farmhand, stevedore, and even a craftsman. Blow decided to expand his farm, so he took Scott and a small group of other slaves to Alabama. There, his plantation was unsuccessful. Therefore, he moved again, this time to open up a hotel in St. Louis, Missouri. Around 1830, he was having financial issues and was planning on selling Scott. The following year, however, him and his wife suddenly became sick, and they both died by 1832. After their deaths, Blow’s sister sold Scott for 500 dollars to a surgeon in the U.S. Army. Dr. John Emerson, a military surgeon stationed at Jefferson Barracks, Missouri, was Scott’s second master. Emerson took Scott up north to states like Illinois and Minnesota, where slavery was banned due to the Missouri Compromise of 1820. On these travels, Scott met and married Harriet Robinson. They had two boys who died in infancy and two girls: Eliza and Lizzie. Emerson also married during his work voyages. He wedded Irene Sanford during a brief stay in Louisiana. In 1842, the Emersons and the Scotts returned to St. Louis, where John Emerson died on December 29 the following year. He left his brother-in-law to look over his estate. Emerson left his property (including Scott’s family) to his widow. It is said that Irene hired out Scott and his wife and children to work for other families. It is also said that
According to the Declaration of Independence, signed in 1776, "[...] all men are created equal, [and] they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." One would then expect that every man, would be entitled to their freedom, and it was true, for all white men. African-Americans, however, faced a very different reality. They were still forced into slavery, they were deprived of those rights that all men were meant to have. While the north states opposed slavery, it was permitted in the south, and as the slavery issue raged on, one man would stand to fight for his freedom. His case, would go all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. The Court's decision would
John granted their request and they married. Harriet and Dred had two sons who died during infancy and two daughters, Eliza and Lizzie. In 1842, the Emersons and the Scotts returned to St. Louis, (The Life of Dred Scott). Dred’s residency in the Upper Louisiana Territory and Illinois gave him the right to become free, but at this time he did not know his rights. When John died in 1843, his widow hired him out to an army captain. While under the Army captain’s command, he tried to find freedom for his family. When Mrs. Emerson refused his offer of three-hundred dollars for their freedom, he decided to take legal action, (Dred Scott’s fight for freedom). These legal actions led to a series of long legal battles. The Blow brothers provided the Scott Family with legal and finical help for court.
Slavery was at the root of the case of Dred Scott v. Sandford. Dred Scott sued his master to obtain freedom for himself and his family. His argument was that he had lived in a territory where slavery was illegal; therefore he should be considered a free man. Dred Scott was born a slave in Virginia around 1800. Scott and his family were slaves owned by Peter Blow and his family. He moved to St. Louis with them in 1830 and was sold to John Emerson, a military doctor. They went to Illinois and the Wisconsin territory where the Missouri Compromise of 1820 prohibited slavery. Dred Scott married and had two
Dred Scott (c. 1799 – September 17, 1858) was an enslaved African American man in the United States who unsuccessfully sued for his freedom and that of his wife and their two daughters in the Dred Scott v. Sandford case of 1857, popularly known as the "Dred Scott Decision". Scott claimed that he and his wife should be granted their freedom because they had lived in Illinois and the Wisconsin Territory for four years, where slavery was illegal. The United States Supreme Court decided 7–2 against Scott, finding that neither he nor any other person of African ancestry could claim citizenship in the United States, and therefore Scott could not bring suit in federal court under diversity of citizenship rules. Moreover, Scott 's temporary
Missouri state court declared Scott to be a free man in 1850. During the time that the
Dred Scott was a slave to Peter Blow family who suffered financial constraints then later sold Scott to a surgeon John Emerson. Emerson moved with Scott to Fort Snelling where slavery was not allowed by Missouri Compromise. During his period at Fort Snelling, Scott married Harriet Robinson a slave too with whom they had two children. Emerson and Scott’s family later moved back to St Louis in the year 1940 where they lived. In 1946 Dr. Emerson passed on, and Scott’s family was left behind with Emerson’s widow as their master. After Dr. Emerson demise, Scott sued Emerson’s family arguing that by him having stayed in Fort Snelling, he had attained his freedom while there and he was a free man. In sought of his freedom, the case was presented to State court, but unfortunately, he lost in case. The case was appealed, and in the year 1857, the case was ruled out by Chief Justice Roger Taney. In the ruling, the court ruled out that, Scotts was not allowed to claim any US citizenship as blacks who were salves or free were not allowed to do so. The ruling also claimed that Scotts had never been free as he was a slave and they were considered as personal property (Konig, Finkelman, & Bracey, 2010). The ruling led to consequences and effects in the US that affected the country politically, culturally and legally as outlined in the paper.
Born in 1800, Dred Scott was sold to army surgeon, John Emerson. Eliza, John’s wife, gives the custody of Dred and Harriet Scott to his brother, John Sanford. Dred Scott wanted to demand what all enslaved people wanted: his freedom. Emerson’s profession was surgery and
How would you feel to give yourself to a collegiate organization, strive to succeed, bring in huge amounts of revenue, and recognition of your college institute and not receive a or dime for their Entertaining contribution? Well, this is the same question that Shipnuck and Alan asked themselves when they wrote this article in support of collegiate athlete payment. For O Bannon just the opportunity to play his favorite sport at the college level and shine was all the compensation he ever needed, but he “has gladly taken up the fight in the most important piece of litigation in the history of collegiate athletics. O’Bannon v. NCAA seeks to establish a form of revenue sharing that would give a slice of the pie to the athletes who, up until now,
As stated above, the rapid spread of abolitionists in the northern states and the pro-slavery activism in the southern states, the United States of America was soon torn apart. In the year of 1820, an act known as the Missouri Compromise was passed, and slavery was banned from all newly created western territories. This passing caused a lot of tension in the southern states because they believed it was going to eventually diminish their industrial success. A few decades later in 1857, the United States Supreme Court made a new legal principle known as the Dred Scott Decision, which stated that African slaves (in the slave
family of Missouri. Emerson soon died in 1846 making Scott sue for his freedom. He soon lost the case in a state
Members of the University of Illinois’s men’s swim team filed a lawsuit in 1993 claiming that the school was discriminating against them by cutting their team and not the women’s swim team. The members claimed that this decision was in violation of Title IX, a law that prohibited discrimination on the basis of gender, along with the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The University of Illinois made the decision to cut the men’s swim team due to budgetary limitations. Along with the men’s swim team, the men’s diving, men’s fencing, and women’s diving team were also cut for the same reason. There were many instances previous to this case where female athletes have filed lawsuits claiming that they were being discriminated against, and that the institution was in violation of
In 1846, a slave living in Missouri named Dred Scott, sued for his freedom on the basis that he had lived for a total of seven years in territories that were closed to slavery. Scott's owner had been an army doctor named John Emerson. Emerson's position had required him to move several times in a relatively short amount of time. During his time with Emerson, Scott had lived in the state of Illinois, which was
According to Miami Herald, the graduates of Stanford University protested to the rapist and supported the victim in their commencement. Some of them held a sign to appeal their claims and anger. Their behavior persuaded interpersonal justice, which focuses on the value of human being as individuals. Everyone should be respected and regarded as precious persons. The defendant and his father had never mentioned about the victim, an unconscious woman, he assaulted. They didn’t care her dignity and inflicted great damage which could not be removed in her whole
Dred Scott was forced to travel around with his owner, a United States army surgeon, Dr. John Emerson. Dr. Emerson was assigned to Fort Armstrong located in Illinois. As of 1818, when Illinois became a state, its state constitution declared it a free state (Gunderson 16). Although illegal, Scott was still forced to work as a slave for his master. Dr. Emerson soon requested a transfer from Fort Armstrong which was quickly answered; his new post was at Fort Snelling. Fort Snelling was located in a newly created Wisconsin Territory near present-day St. Paul, Minnesota where slavery had been banned since 1820 (Gunderson 16). As Dr. Emerson continued to be dissatisfied with many of the forts he traveled without his slaves for a while and met his wife
the name of Eliza and Lizzie. Dr. Emerson eventually returned back to St. Louise himself where he married Irene Sanford. Irene came from a large family in Virginia. In 1840 John was sent down to Florida leaving his land and slaves behind with Mrs. Emerson. She allowed them to stay around and sometimes would rent them out to other families for 5 dollars a month. Dr. Emerson retired in 1842 and died in 1843 leaving all of his property including his slaves to his wife. This is what initiated the fight for the Scotts freedom. Since under the wills terms, Mrs. Emerson did not believe that she could sell the slaves, which she had no use for. However, the state in which they were in-slaved in had the ability to sue for their own freedom. This was