0
The Abolitionist lobby was outraged, because it appeared to make slavery legal in every state of the Union.
Most other Northerners were not so concerned about slavery itself, only that the various Compromises that they had worked so hard on were all declared void, and that the argument would be re-opened.
Wiki User
∙ 12y ago
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
How did the South feel about Dred Scott?
They embraced the decision. It verified their view of a slave society.
What is the southern view about the dred Scott decision?
They were delighted. It appeared to mean that every state in the Union was open for slavery.
What was the northern point of view on the Dred Scott decision?
The most important decisions that the Supreme Court made was that as a slave Dred Scott did not have the right to bring the case to court. Did his time in Wisconsin make him a free man? He was originally a slave who had gotten freed by traveling to a place where slavery was banned. To answer the question the north thought that the court's ruling was a terrible decision and was a false judgment. I hope i answered your question correctly. - Zoe L
How did the north and the south view the dred Scott decision?
Well..I'm sure the South viewed it as a positive thing. The North, of course, abhorred it. They began to worry that slavery was, indeed, legal in the North. They also began to worry that slaves in the South would soon have very few (if any) rights at all. This case came at a very tender time in the US, as slavery was a hot topic of all the elections, and a source of major conflict between the North and South. The rulings of this court case blew all previous conflicts out of the water, and set forth a new wave of bitter disagreement.
What had the greatest impact on the US decision to enter world war 1?
pearl harbor. (that's WWII, not WWI). Public opinion was the main factor that kept the U.S. out of the war during this time. As soon as public opinion/view of the war altered, then President Woodrow Wilson deemed it necessary to interfere.
How did the South feel about Dred Scott?
They embraced the decision. It verified their view of a slave society.
What is the southern view about the dred Scott decision?
They were delighted. It appeared to mean that every state in the Union was open for slavery.
How would supporters of popular sovereignty view the Dred Scott decision and the Kansas-Nebraska Act?
They would view the Kansas-Nebraska Act favourably, because it would allow the citizens of each new state to vote on whether it was to be slave or free. They would view the Dred Scott decision with outrage, because it declared that slavery was legal in every state of the Union.
What was the northern point of view on the Dred Scott decision?
The most important decisions that the Supreme Court made was that as a slave Dred Scott did not have the right to bring the case to court. Did his time in Wisconsin make him a free man? He was originally a slave who had gotten freed by traveling to a place where slavery was banned. To answer the question the north thought that the court's ruling was a terrible decision and was a false judgment. I hope i answered your question correctly. - Zoe L
What was the supreme court's decision in Scott v sanford?
An unexpected ruling about the Constitution and its view of slavery. The court reckoned that when the Founding Fathers declared that a man's property was sacred, they would have included slaves within their definition of property. If so, then slavery must be legal in every state of the Union. This judgment drove the two sides further apart than ever.
How did the Dred Scott decision move people closer to war?
The Dred Scott decision by the US Supreme Court strengthened the cause of pro slavery people, especially in the South. As a subjective answer to this, I maintain that the Court decision did not affect, or bring the USA to Civil War. There is no evidence to the contrary. Therefore I stand on this opinion.
Was dred Scott successful or unsuccessful?
He was successful only in the sense that he was eventually freed, along with all the others, as a result of the Civil War. But iit was his (unnecessary) bid for freedom that raised the temperature of the slavery debate and helped to start the war in the first place. Dred Scott's freedom, weighed against 600,000 dead American soldiers? It is hard to view Scott as the virtuous victim.
Was the Dred Scott case Constitutional?
Unfortunately, at the time the Dred Scott decision was made (1857), there were no constitutional provisions specifically protecting African-Americans, who were wrongly viewed as property rather than human beings. This meant the US Supreme Court could rationalize that they weren't protected by the Bill of Rights, and is the reason the Thirteenth, Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments were ratified after the Civil War.Many of the Framers of the Constitution held the same view, which is why slaves were only counted as three-fifths of a person (Article I, per the Three-Fifths Compromise) in determining state representation in the US House of Representatives.Case Citation:Dred Scott v. Sanford, 60 US 393 (1857)
What was the view of the US Supreme Court on the issue of slavery and Declaration of Independence?
The Supreme Court wasn't existence when the Declaration of Independence was written and it is not used in court cases. It won't exist until 1789. I think you are giving the Declaration of Independence too much emphasis as a document in shaping of the government. As far as slavery goes it depended on who was on the court and the case. An example of this would be the Dred Scott decision. In this decision a slave was classified as property and didn't have any rights.
What was the Norths point of view by the 1850?
The North did not want slavery they thought it was wrong to treat African Americans different from others.
Does winfield Scott view on slavery and secession?
Who knows, but I can tell you Winfield Scott's view on grammatically incorrect sentences. He was against them.
How did the First Battle of Bull Run affect the Norths view of the Civil War?
It demonstrated that they were not ready for combat, and that is why there were no more serious battles for over six months.
