Why did the dred Scott say voters could not ban slavery?

Answer 1

On March 6, 1857, in its Dred Scott decision, the Supreme Court ruled that Mr. Scott, a slave who had spent part of his life in non-slave territory, could not sue for his freedom in a federal court because, as the March 7 New York Times summarized, “Negroes, whether slaves or free, that is, men of the African race, are not citizens of the United States by the Constitution.”

The Dred Scott case occurred at a time when the slavery issue threatened to tear the country apart. Settlers were violently clashing in Kansas and neighboring Missouri regarding the issue, and in May 1856, a pro-slavery congressman beat an abolitionist senator into unconsciousness on the Senate floor.

The decision came just two days after the inauguration of President James Buchanan, a Southerner and supporter of slavery, who hoped the case could help settle the issue. The court, in addition to declaring that black people were not citizens, made several other rulings on slavery. It held that Congress did not have the power to abolish it in territories as it had done in the Missouri Compromise of 1820, which banned slavery in northern territories. It also declared that Mr. Scott, or any slave, could not become free by spending time in free territory because he was still his owner’s property.

Rather than settling the slavery debate, the decision increased the animosity between pro- and anti-slavery factions, further divided North and South, and contributed to the start of the Civil War four years later. The outrage over the decision strengthened the anti-slavery movement, which united under the burgeoning Republican Party. Abraham Lincoln rose to prominence arguing against slavery and attacking the Dred Scott decision.

The Democrats, meanwhile, became divided as moderates like Stephen A. Douglas — famous for his support of slavery being decided in new territories by popular sovereignty, a policy that was negated by the decision — objected to calls by more hardline pro-slavery advocates for a national slave code. The split party lost to Mr. Lincoln in the 1860 presidential election, which precipitated the secession of Southern states and the Civil War.

Answer 2

It didn't say that. The decision stated that slaves were property and had no civil rights, so Scott suing for his freedom had no merit.