Home
/
History
/
8. Dred Scott v.Sandford, March 6,1857 declared that (1) the Missouri Compromise was unconstitutional (2) that Congress did not have the authority to prohibit slavery in the territories (3) that slaves were not citizens of the United States and could not sue in Federal courts. How was the ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court in Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857), increase sectional tension in the United States? a. The decision supported the Missouri Compromise, which Southern farmers considered an unfair benet for the West. b. The ruling emancipated slaves when taken into free territories, which Southern slave owners saw as an illegal seizure of their property. c. The decision struck down the power of Congress to prohibit slavery in the territories, eliminating the economic advantages of Southern planters. d. The ruling declared that regardless of location, slaves were not citizens, which Northerners viewed as a violation of state law and human rights.

Question

8. Dred Scott v.Sandford, March 6,1857 declared that (1) the Missouri Compromise was unconstitutional (2)
that Congress did not have the authority to prohibit slavery in the territories (3) that slaves were not citizens of
the United States and could not sue in Federal courts.
How was the ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court in Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857), increase sectional tension in
the United States?
a. The decision supported the Missouri Compromise, which Southern farmers considered an unfair benet
for the West.
b. The ruling emancipated slaves when taken into free territories, which Southern slave owners saw as an
illegal seizure of their property.
c. The decision struck down the power of Congress to prohibit slavery in the territories, eliminating the
economic advantages of Southern planters.
d. The ruling declared that regardless of location, slaves were not citizens, which Northerners viewed as a
violation of state law and human rights.

8. Dred Scott v.Sandford, March 6,1857 declared that (1) the Missouri Compromise was unconstitutional (2) that Congress did not have the authority to prohibit slavery in the territories (3) that slaves were not citizens of the United States and could not sue in Federal courts. How was the ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court in Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857), increase sectional tension in the United States? a. The decision supported the Missouri Compromise, which Southern farmers considered an unfair benet for the West. b. The ruling emancipated slaves when taken into free territories, which Southern slave owners saw as an illegal seizure of their property. c. The decision struck down the power of Congress to prohibit slavery in the territories, eliminating the economic advantages of Southern planters. d. The ruling declared that regardless of location, slaves were not citizens, which Northerners viewed as a violation of state law and human rights.

expert verifiedVerification of experts

Answer

4.0318 Voting
avatar
RyanVeteran · Tutor for 12 years

Answer

d. The ruling declared that regardless of location, slaves were not citizens, which Northerners viewed as a violation of state law and human rights.
Click to rate:

Hot Questions

More x