By Marwan Arafa ‘28

The Taney Court

Roger B. Taney’s appointment to the Supreme Court took the Senate three months of deliberation before they finally voted him in. Taney was heavily criticized by contemporaries of his time. A New York publication, for instance, said, “The pure ermine of the Supreme Court is sullied by the appointment of that political hack.”

Introduction

In 1857, the United States Supreme Court set a dangerous precedent that remained for years, only to be overturned with the passage of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution, where African Americans were given citizenship and seen as equals in the eyes of the law. The case was monumental as, at the time, it made the Missouri Compromise essentially useless, as African Americans anywhere were declared not to be citizens, even those who became freedmen. Furthermore, since the case determined that all African Americans were not American citizens, they could not do things such as sue in federal court.

k, Roger B. Taney.” During the debate over Taney, politician Daniel Webster claimed, “Judge Story... thinks the Supreme Court is gone, and I think so too.” He was also the first Catholic to be seated on the Supreme Court.

The court became incredibly Jacksonian upon his ascension to it. President Andrew Jackson appointed him and had been a longtime ally of his, using his help during the Bank War in the preceding years. President Jackson had also appointed Taney as Attorney General during his presidency and even fired his Secretary of the Treasury and appointed Taney as his replacement. In his new role, he helped Jackson take down the national bank. As Attorney General, he also acted as Secretary of War, holding much influence in the era of Jacksonian politics. 

Dred Scott: Freeman (?)

Dred Scott was born a slave in Southampton, Virginia, around 1800. In 1830, he was sold to Dr. John Emerson, a military surgeon stationed in St. Louis. He eventually traveled with Emerson to Wisconsin, a free territory, to complete tasks with him. While there, Scott married Harriet Robinson, and while traveling in Louisiana, Emerson married Irene Sanford. In 1842, they all returned to St. Louis. In 1846, following Emerson’s death, Scott filed a lawsuit against his widow for his and his wife’s freedom, claiming that since they had lived in free territories for many years, they deserved to be free under the doctrine “once free, always free” that Missouri courts used in the past. 

Dred Scott’s case was presented in 1846 in St. Louis. Although the Scotts lost their first trial due to bringing up hearsay evidence, they were granted a second trial. In their second trial in 1850, a jury of 12 white men sided with the Scotts and agreed that they should be free. However, Mrs. Emerson appealed the case to the Missouri State Supreme Court, which overturned the lower court’s ruling in 1852, most likely due to political reasons, as the topic of slavery had become a more contentious national debate. 

Dred Scott, naturally, appealed the case to federal court. Since the lawsuit was against John Sanford, Mrs. Emerson’s brother and executor of the estate, who resided outside of Missouri, the case was taken to federal court. The court, however, decided against Scott yet again, and thus Scott appealed his case to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Question

At the time, the North and South were engaged in a bitter debate about slavery. The Missouri Compromise of 1820 dictated that Missouri would enter the union as a slave state and Maine as a free state, and any states above the 36º 30' latitude line.

In the past, slaves who lived in free territory became freemen. However, Dred Scott v. Sanford was different, and its elevation to the Supreme Court would set a precedent for all future discussions on slavery.

The Court’s Decision

The U.S. Supreme Court sided 7-2 with Sanford against Dred Scott, claiming that not only could Congress not ban slavery from federal territories, but that African Americans were not citizens of the United States and did not have standing as such to sue in federal court.

The Missouri Compromise was claimed to be unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, stating that Congress did not have the power to regulate whether slaves were free or not. Furthermore, slaves were stated to be property under the Fifth Amendment, making any law stripping slave owners of their property unconstitutional. 

Chief Justice Taney dismissed the case due to the Supreme Court’s lack of jurisdiction, due to the court’s claim that Scott was not a citizen and thus couldn’t sue in federal court.

Justice Benjamin Curtis dissented, claiming that it was unnecessary to say that the Missouri Compromise was unconstitutional. He also criticized Chief Justice Taney’s methodology of claiming that the court had a lack of jurisdiction. 

Justice McLean shared many of Justice Curtis’ thoughts on the opinion on the court’s jurisdiction. He also disagreed with how African American men were not counted as citizens, citing their right to vote in five states.

Impact

The decision added fuel to the fire of the debate around slavery even though the intention was to end it. The Dred Scott decision caused immense ire among abolitionists, who viewed it as a way to end debate on slavery in American territories. The rift between the Northern abolitionist states and the Southern pro-slavery states grew, and a few years later, the Civil War began.

The case was effectively overturned with the passage of the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments, which freed slaves in the country and gave them equal rights. The case resonates today still, even though it is no longer legally binding. The racist and discriminatory undertones of the decision still resonate somewhat in today’s society when it comes to implicit bias. Furthermore, the case highlights the need to understand racism’s continuing role and its intertwining in modern society, and the lack of resources and opportunities in today’s time.

Dred Scott and his wife were eventually freed, however, as Mrs. Emerson’s second husband was Maryland congressman Calvin Chafee. Upon learning of her ownership of the Scotts, he attempted to gain their freedom, which was eventually achieved. Scott did not live long to enjoy it, however, dying in 1858 due to tuberculosis.

The Dred Scott decision is widely viewed as the worst decision the Supreme Court has ever given.

Marwan Arafa is a sophomore majoring in political science.

Sources

Ashcroft, J. R. (2019). Missouri Digital Heritage: Dred Scott Case, 1846-1857. Mo.gov. https://www.sos.mo.gov/archives/resources/africanamerican/scott/scott.asp 

Dred Scott. (2010). Thedredscottfoundation.org. https://www.thedredscottfoundation.org/dshf/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=50&Itemid=55 

Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857). (2020, November). LII / Legal Information Institute. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/dred_scott_v_sandford_(1857) 

History of the Court: The Taney Court, 1836-1864. (n.d.). Supreme Court Historical Society. https://supremecourthistory.org/history-of-the-courts/taney-court-1836-1864/ 

History.com Editors. (2009, October 27). Dred Scott Case - Decision, Definition & Impact | HISTORY. HISTORY. https://www.history.com/articles/dred-scott-case 

National Archives. (2024, July 8). Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857). National Archives; The U.S. National Archives and Records Administration. https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/dred-scott-v-sandford 

National Park Service. (2021, May 14). Slavery as a Cause of the Civil War - Lincoln Home National Historic Site (U.S. National Park Service). Www.nps.gov; National Park Service. https://www.nps.gov/liho/learn/historyculture/slavery-cause-civil-war.htm 

Oyez. (2019). Dred Scott v. Sandford. Oyez.org. https://www.oyez.org/cases/1850-1900/60us393