The decision of the Supreme Court in the Dred Scott case declared that the Constitution protected property - and that slaves were property. Simple as that.
This could be taken to mean that no state could be officially free soil - the issue in the famous Lincoln-Douglas debates, which first brought Lincoln to nationwide notice.
Because it said slavery was protected by the Constitution.
...slavery was protected by the constitution on the grounds that a man's property was sacred and slaves were property.
It appeared to mean that slavery was protected by the Constitution, and could not be banned from any state of the Union.
It declared that slavery was protected by the Constitution, and asserted that a black man should not be allowed to sue his master.
The court ruled that slavery was protected by the constitution, so the Missouri Compromise (which banned slavery North of a certain parallel) was invalid.
The decision on Dred Scott vs. Sanford was made by the US Supreme Court on March 6, 1857. For all practical purposes, the Court ruled that slavery was legal and that slaves were property.
The court ruled that slavery was protected by the constitution, so the Missouri Compromise (which banned slavery North of a certain parallel) was invalid.
By declaring that the Constitution protected slavery throughout the USA, the Supreme Court drove the two sides further apart, and helped to bring war closer.
The Supreme Court denied Scott his freedom on the grounds that slavery was protected by the Constitution. (They judged that the Founding Fathers would have included slaves in their definition of 'property' - which was declared sacred under the Constitution.) This decision infuriated the influential Abolitionists in the North, as much as it delighted the South, and deepened the division between the two sections.
It allowed slavery and found Scott to be property.
The decision on Dred Scott vs. Sanford was made by the US Supreme Court on March 6, 1857. For all practical purposes, the Court ruled that slavery was legal and that slaves were property.
He was against it , but he realized that it was protected by the Constitution and important to the Southern economy.