Login or Sign Up
Menu
Ask a New Question

Excerpt from Dred Scott v. Sanford (1857)

4. A free negro of the African race, whose ancestors were brought to this country and sold as slaves, is not a "citizen" within the meaning of the Constitution of the United States.
5. When the Constitution was adopted, they were not regarded in any of the States as members of the community which constituted the State, and were not numbered among its "people or citizen." Consequently, the special rights and immunities guaranteed to citizens do not apply to them. And not being "citizens" within the meaning of the Constitution, they are not entitled to sue in that character in a court of the United States, and the Circuit Court has not jurisdiction in such a suit.
Use the excerpt to answer the question.
Why might this decision have angered people in the North and appeased people in the South?
(1 point)
• It permitted the spread of slavery.
• It upheld state laws over federal laws.
It weakened the power of the national government.
It protected the rights of slaveowners across the nation.

This decision might have angered people in the North because it upheld the view that free African Americans were not considered citizens under the Constitution, which went against the growing abolitionist movement and the belief in equal rights for all individuals. It might have appeased people in the South because it protected the rights of slaveowners by reinforcing the institution of slavery and denying citizenship rights to African Americans, thus maintaining the social and economic hierarchy of the region.