The Morality Of The Justice System: The 1860 Presidential Election

A Free African named Dred Scott was accused of being a former slave and was put on trial. The Chief justice, Roger Taney, was extremely biased for the Slave owners because he thought slavery helped America immensely. With his opinion, the verdict was that free states don’t exist and that he is a slave in any state. This verdict forced Dred Scott back into slavery when he was a free man. This event is significant because this court case was during the Mexican American war which fought over the annexation of a slave state and Dred Scott forced back into slavery shows that Slave owners and the Supreme Court justice will stop at nothing to make sure slavery is consistent and successful in America. Abolitionists were frustrated because of all the work been done to abolish slavery has shown to be useless based off of the events that are happening around them. Also, the verdict came out bad for the abolitionists, therefore; there's no telling what Slave owners can do that can influence the government to accustom to their

Dred Scott vs. Sanford – Dred Scott, a slave from Missouri, owned by an army surgeon who had taken Scott into Illinois and Wisconsin where slavery was forbidden. Now, the surgeon’s brother was claiming ownership of Scott. The court was extremely divided but eventually declared that Scott didn’t have a case because he wasn’t a legal citizen.

In a Court in St. Louis, Dred Scott and his wife, Harriet, were slaves. They tried to sue to get their freedom on the ground that they lived on. Instead, the ignorance of the Court did not guarantee their freedom because according to the Constitution, they are their master's property. At the same time, the Court also ruled that the Missouri Compromise was unconstitutional. According to the Court's opinion, no slave had the right to be a citizen of the United States and could not expect or have any protection from the Federal Government or any of the courts and the opinion also stated that the Congress does not have any right to ban slavery. It was then considered by the legal scholars to be the worst ever provided by the Supreme Court ever.

Dred Scott decision. Dred Scott moved North with his master and sues claiming that because he was in free territory, he was no longer a slave. The case goes to the Supreme Court and they rule in favor of Dred Scott’s master and the court says that not only is Dred Scott not free, but he cannot even bring a case to court. Many see this as the Federal Government backing the institution of slavery. The Dred Scott decision was a major win for the South and Pro-slavery citizens. This is an example of slaves having no rights. Eventually in 1861, war broke out between the Union(North) and the confederacy(South) when the confederacy attacked Fort Sumter. Each side had different ideas. The Union wanted to make all men free and the Confederacy wanted

On March 6, 1857 the controversial ruling of the Dred Scott vs. Stanford case was given causing dissention in the nation. The Supreme Court ruled over whether Dred Scott was a free slave and if slavery will expand to the new territories. The Court permitted slavery in the New Territories. It declared Scott was property, and therefore he was not free based on the Fifth Amendment, which says the right to property cannot be infringed upon. This meant he was not a free man even though he had returned from a free state. The Court decided that slaves were not American citizens. Meaning Scott or any other slave did not have the right to sue in federal court. This caused major issues between four major political groups: the Fire Eaters, the

America, an established nation, was not only growing in land mass, population, and innovations rapidly, but was establishing a reputation in the world. The Constitution was still in effect, holding the nation together and giving it boundaries to abide by. However, slavery was becoming a major issue that was starting to divide the nation. Much of the North was against slavery completely, whereas much of the South was a strong supporter of slavery. During the early 1800’s, there were many presidential elections with all the candidates looking to fill the roles of their predecessors, George Washington and John Adams. All of the candidates looked to leave a positive, lasting impact on the growth and development of the United States. There were multiple candidates for each election, all with varying views on government and different issues to address during each election. The elections of 1852, 1856, 1860, and 1864 were all significant elections in the molding of the United States.

　　　　The Dred Scott decision was significant because it was the first time since Marbury v. Madison that the Supreme Court said an act of congress was unconstitutional. It said the congress had no power to ban slavery in the federal territories; therefore, the Missouri Compromise was unconstitutional. By doing this, the Court also said people in the territories had no right to decide whether their state should be a free or a slave state. This was known as popular sovereignty. The decision also hurt the new Republican Party which was trying to stop the spread of slavery. Further, this decision continued the conflict over slavery between the north and south and

In March of 1857, the Supreme Court agreed upon the Dred Scott Decision, stating that African Americans were not entitled to Constitutional protection because they are not legally United States citizens. Those who wrote the United States Constitution had not intended for black people to be seen as equal to whites so therefore they

In March 5,1857, after deliberating for several months, Chief Justice Roger Taney issued the ruling. The Court determined, by a majority of seven to two, that Dred Scott and his family were still slaves. It stated that even if, the Scotts had traveled into free territory, moving back to St.Louis had made them slaves once more. However, The Court decided to go further and addressed other issues regarding slavery and blacks. On citizenship, the Court decided no black could ever be a citizen, in Taney's own words "slaves nor their descendants, whether... free or not, were then acknowledged as part of the people [citizens]"# According to this, Scott was only property , therefore he did not have the right to file suit, and as a result was never free. The Court also decided to rule the

Enter the presidential election of 1860, which brought these problems to a collision with dramatic consequences. The Democratic Party split into three groups along their regional lines, with each one vying for control of the party and each holding different ideas about how to deal with slavery in the West. They camps consisted of John C. Breckinride, John Bell, and Stephen A. Douglas; their efforts would be worthless however, as Abraham Lincoln would win for the Republican Party. Lincoln stood on the grounds that the West should be absolutely free of slavery entirely; which apparently was enough as he won the election with less than forty percent of the popular vote. On a side note about the election, fifty-nine percent of the Electoral College did vote for Lincoln;

In November of 1860, the presidential election was one of the most momentous in the history of the United States. The land was split between North and the South and was smoldering for almost a decade. The candidates for the presidential election of 1860 were Abraham Lincoln, Republican, John Breckinridge, Southern Democrat, John Bell, Constitutional Union, and Stephen Douglas, Northern Democratic. Abraham Lincoln was against the increase of slavery into the new territories. Lincoln did not receive one vote from the south, but he did win over 50% of the Electoral College votes so Lincoln won the presidency to become the 16th President of the United States. Abraham Lincoln was known as one of America’s greatest heroes because of his inconceivable impact on our nation and his unique appeal. Lincoln was a captain in the military and a lawyer all before becoming the 16th President of the United States. Lincoln was one of two U.S. presidents who was assassinated while in office. Lincoln was also the president during the roughest part of American history, the Civil War. Lincoln was heavily in favor of abolishing slavery and so most of the citizens in the northern states of the U.S... On the other hand, the south had large plantations and favored slavery because the slaves worked for free and made plantation owners and other farmers a staggering amount of profit. The slaves were not treated as human beings; therefore, the slaves were mistreated. Slave owners often beat their slaves

Sanford was another hot political issue. Dred Scott and his wife were taken to a free state by their master, and the ruling on this case stated that Scott was still legally bound to his master and must remain a slave. This decision was based on three main factors. The first factor was that Scott was not a citizen and could not sue in Federal court. The second factor was that it was unconstitutional for Congress to outlaw slavery in a territory. The last factor stated that although Scott and his family were heading in and out of Free states, it did not affect their standing as slaves.

One of the ways Southerners defended slavery was through legal means. Although the economic and religious aspects of slavery helped to directly support the moral argument of pro-slavery Southerners, the legal aspects of slavery served as visible victories and defending events in Southern philosophy. In 1831-1832, Virginia legislature debated and eventually defeated various emancipation proposals. This legislation was a turning point in the pro-slavery fight. An example of is is the Dred Scott Decision. An excellent example of the legal side to the Southern arguments and the Southern definition of popular sovereignty. With the Dred Scott Decision, the courts declared that the whole African American race had no legal standing as persons in courts also that all blacks were seen as property, and the Constitution protected property rights of the people, which includes slave owners. Moreover, pro-slavery Southerners

     One of the final cause of the Civil was involved a slave named Dred Scott. Dred Scott was an enslaved person owned by John Emerson. Emerson took Dred Scott from Missouri to Illinois, a free state. They then moved back to Missouri, which was a slave state under the Missouri Compromise. In 1857 Dred Scott sued the state of Missouri on the claim that by living in a free state, he was free and had earned his freedom. Scott won that case, but the ruling was later overturn by the Missouri Supreme Court. The Missouri Supreme Court ruled that the compromises including the Missouri Compromise were unconstitutional and that African Americans were not United State citizens and could not be a citizen. Slaves were considered property and had no rights.

In the March of 1857 Dred Scott, a slave who had lived in a free state for many years, came before the Supreme Court to argue that he was entitled to emancipation. Chief Justice Roger B. Taney ruled that no black