The judge's ruling in the Dred Scott case stated that slaves and freed slaves were not US citizens. Thus they had no power to sue in court and the federal government could not control slavery.
First of all, your question makes absolutely no sense at all but, The Dread Scott Decision happened in 1857 and declared that Slaves were property no matter where they were and it was decided in the state of Washington D.C at the supreme court but the crime in question happened on the border of Kansas and Missouri
Dred Scott
The Dread Scott case was the Supreme Court case the stated that Congress did not have the right to ban slavery in states and that blacks were not citizens.
Scott was denied his freedom. The Court ruled that slavery was legal in every state of the Union. The ruling divided the two sections more than ever.
After the Dread Scott case the Supreme Court declared the Missouri Compromise of 1820 unconstitutional
Dred Scott sued his master for his freedom on the grounds that he had been living on free soil for several years. The Supreme Court decided that he was not a citizen and had no legal right to sue.
The verdict by the Supreme Court appeared to mean that all property, including slave property, was sacred, and that no state could declare itself to be free soil.
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.
dread scoot is a former slave and his case is not impartant
It declared slavery to be lawful in every state of the Union. Its effect was to heighten the dispute betwen the two sides, and to help bring on the Civil War - which eventually freed all the slaves.
Prior to and during the Dred Scott case, only the lawyer who represented him gave him any help. The Supreme Court ruled that no African Americans, whether free or enslaved, had citizenship in the United States, a decision that enraged abolitionists and empowered slave holders. After the decision, Scott's owner married an abolitionist, who persuaded her to return Scott and his family to his original owners. By this time, his original owners were also anti-slavery, and he and his family were freed.
The Dred Scott case, decided by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1857, ruled that African Americans, whether free or enslaved, were not considered citizens and therefore could not sue in federal court. This decision intensified tensions between the North and South over the issue of slavery and further fueled the growing divide that eventually led to the Civil War.
In the Dred Scott v. Sandford case, the Supreme Court ruled that African Americans were not and could never be citizens of the United States, and therefore could not sue in federal court. The decision also declared the Missouri Compromise unconstitutional, stating that Congress did not have the authority to prohibit slavery in the territories. This decision further fueled tensions between pro-slavery and anti-slavery factions leading up to the Civil War.