they said that he was a piece of property and could not sue for his freedom
Wiki User
∙ 12y agoBecause the decision showed that the Supreme Court didn't think that any State could outlaw slavery.
The Dred Scott decision
The Dred Scott decision stated that people of African decent imported to America were not citizens and not protected by the Constitution. The fourteenth and fifteenth amendments nullified that decision.
14th amendment
The admission of California to the Union - it was too big to be accommodated according to the terms of that compromise.
Roger Taney - ironically a one-tme abolitionist.
The North was upset because the decision declared the Missouri Compromise to be unconstitutional. - Novanet
he was angry bc his bf broke up with him that wasnt good
The North was upset because the decision declared the Missouri Compromise to be unconstitutional. - Novanet
The North was upset because the decision declared the Missouri Compromise to be unconstitutional. - Novanet
Because the decision showed that the Supreme Court didn't think that any State could outlaw slavery.
Southerners were delighted with the Dred Scott decision, but northerners were outraged.
The North was upset because the decision declared the Missouri Compromise to be unconstitutional. - Novanet
Southerners benefited the most from the Dred Scott Decision.
The North was upset because the decision declared the Missouri Compromise to be unconstitutional. - Novanet
Roger Taney - a too-elderly judge who (ironically) had started off as an Abolitionist
Abolitionists were outraged by the Supreme Court's decision in the Dred Scott case, as it ruled that African Americans, whether free or enslaved, were not citizens and therefore did not have the right to sue in federal court. They saw this decision as a setback to the abolitionist movement and a reinforcement of the institution of slavery.