Dred Scott v. Sandford | Homework Help from the Bill of Rights Institute
Vložit
- čas přidán 27. 06. 2024
- The Dred Scott v Sandford case of 1857 was brought to the Supreme Court just four years before the start of the Civil War. Dred Scott sued his master for his freedom and Judge Robert Taney ultimately ruled two things in the Dred Scott decision. First, African Americans were not citizens and had no right to sue in court. Second, Congress did not have the constitutional authority to ban slavery from the states. This case is considered one of the worst rulings in the history of the Supreme Court.
Supreme Court Document-Based Questions: billofrightsinstitute.org/cur...
Excerpts from Dred Scott v. Sanford: billofrightsinstitute.org/e-l...
The Plainest Demands of Justice: billofrightsinstitute.org/cur...
Landmark Supreme Court: billofrightsinstitute.org/lan...
About Bill of Rights Institute:
Established in September 1999, the Bill of Rights Institute is a 501(c)(3) non-profit educational organization that works to engage, educate, and empower individuals with a passion for the freedom and opportunity that exist in a free society. The Institute develops educational resources and programs for a network of more than 50,000 educators and 70,000 students nationwide.
Official Site: billofrightsinstitute.org
Facebook: / billofrightsinstitute
Twitter: / brinstitute
Instagram: / brinstitute
BRI Educator Newsletter Sign Up Page: billofrightsinstitute.org/new...
#dredscottvsandford #dredscott #dredscottdecision #dredscottvsandford1857 #dredscottvsandfordimpact #dredscottvsandfordoutcome #dredscottvsandfordcase #whatwasdredscottdecision #dredscottholding
Wow, America does indeed have a disturbing past.
MR. GUY anyone would be mad because of this disgusting country. I can probably see why u arent. Pro-slavery? Theres a lot more to be mad about than that
hell yeah. we’re toxic, broke, abusers, etc. it’s like my most recent boyfriend.
I wanna move to Canada, you guys seem really nice up there
@@jesuschrist2065 except the Canadian government continues to oppress and kill Native Americans. and they are no better than the US with racism against black people.
What's your real name? Why are you hiding? What's your purpose?
And yes, it's in the past -- the idea is to learn from it and do the best we can from now on, not to punish the sons for the acts of the fathers. (Except in North Korea.)
Put on your long pants and do something now, to make tomorrow better.
Whoever is using this for online learning, leave a like.
Online school gang
Worst SC Decision ever, and worst Chief Justice ever.
Maybe roe v wade... one allows murder one allows dehumanization... both completely abhorrent evil...
@@yofo1621 ok
@@yofo1621 oh stfu
@@yofo1621 fetuses aren't real people so they don't deserve life. question why do you eat meat they where brutally killed for you to eat that burger.
i think the court ruled correctly but should have used better language. it was not the courts place to decide the issue of slavery. they ruled correctly about property though. it was congress or more likely the state's responsibility to rule about the issue of slavery. keep in mind this court case would have never made it very far at all if it wasn't for the fact that scott's original owners paid for his lawyers.
Dred Scott is an example of the legitimisation of immortality and the banality of evil.
Lincoln was like: Hold my Beer
500,000 die at the hands of their brother in one of the bloodiest wars in all of history. yeah. way to go mr. lincoln.
getting ready for that online ap government exam :/
im in seventh grade what is my teacher on im-
maeve joerss this case did not even come out in my test 💀 but you never know it might come in handy
@@maevejoerss1055 Discord: Pei#0001
Watching this for the second time - thank you so much!
Thank you :)
Thank you teacher Jennifer I learned so much from this video
I know this music lol it comes from the free adobe site when making a video lmaoo
😂
do u know the name??
my teacher put 2 links one was this and second was rick roll ....
And, it's never been overturned by the court! The 13th and 14th Amendments only overturned limited parts of it. I like what the court had to say about the rights American's have in that decision; especially, pertaining to where they can go, when and what they may carry with them, "EVERYWHERE THEY GO"!!!
exactly taney and i pronounce the name correctly unlike the narrator. was right about certain things. he did have a good argument. his argement was that "slaves" are not citizens because they are property. and you can bring your property anywhere and it is still your property. it was not the supreme court's job to end slavery. that belonged to congress if you were a federalist and that belonged to the individual states if you were a democrat.
i'm not sure of the word he actually used but i know for damn sure he did not use the words african american in his opinion..
I dread learning about Dred Scott🤣🤣
Thank you Drew Scott
drew bruh
Hey Mr. Burr. Hope your class is going well.
amazing!
Glad you liked it.
it really helped
Wisconsin was a territory, not a state, which is an important point. The MO Comp. 1820 prohibited slavery in territories, which is why Taney deemed it unconstitutional (Congress has no power to determine laws in territories). Nevertheless, the ruling was an overstep of SC power; once Taney ruled Scott had no right to sue, the case should have been shut, yet he went on to make further rulings in order to strengthen the institution of slavery. And it's pronounced "Tawney" btw. Fun fact, Taney swore Lincoln in as president just before Lincoln bashed this decision in his inaugural address. Taney died just a couple weeks before slavery was abolished in his home state of Maryland.
You failed to mention that Illinois was a free state in which Dred Scott also lived before he relocated to Wisconsin and sued for freedom afterwards. therefore, Congress had power to rule on the case. No need to analyze whether Wisconsin should have been a free territory or not in this case.
@Larkyn why’d o you think they’re here?? at least he’s smart bitch
it literally says in article 4 of the constitution that Congress can dispose of and add and needful rules and regulations to *territories or other property* meaning they did have the power.
@@NoName-eq4fc taney's argument and correct argument in my opinion is that it doesn't matter what state you go to your property is still YOUR property.
@@sydney8897 they didn't have the power to say that because you go to a particular state or particular territory that you lose your property. your property is still yours no matter where you go.
Taney really said: "My source was that I made it the fuck up" and won.
how do we see this descision in action?
you see it all the time. when you cross state lines your property is still your property and no one can change that.
@@psilocybemusashi A ridiculous surmise that a state line changes ones legal status of U.S. citizen to mere property if crossing a state border , based on ones skin pigment .
what
same i've watched it three times and still don't get it
Scott thought he was free because he entered a free state. He sued. Supreme Court was like lol no you can't do that 'cuz you're black. Black people aren't citizens and can't sue. They said that Congress can't abolish slavery and stuff (which they could). Bad decision and BAM Civil War
@@leahlandon8429 thank you for writing my essay for me, and saving me 3 minutes of my life
What does Article IV have to do with Taney's commentary?!?
Taney ruled /believed that Congress didn't have the authority to ban slavery from the states but it states in the Article IV that Congress does have the power. simple as that, he basically violated the constitution by using his own interpretation of it
This makes me think about how these innocent black people are being killed, and these cops are getting off with paid leave.
fr
Because they don’t have a identity and nationality meaning not part of a human group making them 3/5 a human without a nation with a flag those so called blacks are aboriginal and not black because black is a color if you going to talk about complexion it called dark or light hue and copper tones Peace
@@georgeray169 basically the real hebrews.
cool vid
i know right?
Hi Daddy what are you doing on youtube
not when you are forced to watch it lmao
Ok
but was it overruled?
lmfao. overrulled? no it was never overruled. it is still case law and has important clarification on property rights.
I’m here for school 😭🦟
Ik for sure yall school giving us assignments on this can we just put the answer on the comments
Yea
no
This video says something different from all the others
bruh had to watch this crap for school
Walter
Enslaver - not master - they were not and are not dogs
of course they weren’t, that’s just the term they used then
They were not called African Americans in 1857, this why you do your genealogy today because look how they try and interchange negro, Indian, colored, black, and African American (socio political construct neither anthropological or scientific in nature according to the Office of Management and Budget l)
Back then I don't even think they were called Human Beings!
@@carmenmercedes9903 we had to go over the whole constitution before thanksgiving break and I think it labeled everyone but white men “other” or something like that. women, blacks, native Americans, anyone that wasn’t the white man. sad shit
@@jesuschrist2065 oh ok. But did you know that when Jackson was president the Native Americans had to become Christian, straight, and only have one partner at a time?
@@carmenmercedes9903 no, but that’s really interesting, I can use it for my report so thank you!! also, was it traditional for Native American to have 2+ partners, and if so did they all have to be of the opposite sex??
@@jesuschrist2065 I don't know, my textbook just said they had to convert to heterosexual monogamy
🥜🥜🥜
If anyone wants to talk about this: Pei#0001 (discord)
@Lonely GV Well, it should
Pei#0001
School bad
Hi
1:54 "Incorrectly..." ?? Lol.
Ralph Thompson yes.
yep, it was incorrect. keep watching the video before idiotically commenting
yes. he literally said right after that that taney INCORRECTLY stated African Americans have no rights
dislike the music
*h u h*
who else is in beck junior high watching this
村民
I hate history
I have to watch 3 videos on this guy and not to say that it isn’t important but we’ve been going over all about slavery for the past 5 months. I know a lot more than I ever have, but my God I want to hear something else before the school year ends
@@jesuschrist2065 i have a question for my homework. Was Dred Scott a slave or a free man? Why or Why not
man, the music is so distracting. and so out of spirit with the context of the clip. are we celebrating???
of course we are. we are celebrating our rich and incredible history. of imperfect men during trying times. these days we have such a wonderful country for blacks that we don't have to buy them from belgian merchants any longer. they will do anything to get to our wonderful free country. this case addressed important issues about property rights. these critiques of taney all focus on a certain language that they will never quote exactly because it wouldn't make sense to us in modern language they change it to imply that taney was indicating the framers of the constitution were racist and that is not wat it was. his argument that the framers accepted slavery. and they did. most of them that signed it owned slaves and considered them their property. congress had written hundreds of laws including the notorious fugitive slave act that established that slaves were property. by definition property cannot be a citizen.
not tan-ey, its pronounced tawn, ey. But good try,
Say Taney's name correctly. It's pronounced "tawny."
You have no rights, only privileges.