On what primary legal basis did Dred Scott argue for his freedom before the Supreme Court?
Show answer and explanation
Correct answer: His long residence in a free state and territory made him free
Dred Scott’s legal team argued that because he had lived in Illinois (a free state) and the Wisconsin Territory (a free territory), his status had legally shifted from enslaved to free. This was based on the doctrine of 'once free, always free' that had been recognized in earlier Missouri court cases.
Keep practicing
More Dred Scott v. Sandford questions
- What was Chief Justice Roger B. Taney's ruling regarding the citizenship of African Americans?
- The Dred Scott decision declared which major 19th-century act of Congress unconstitutional?
- Which constitutional amendment was used by the Court to argue that Congress could not prohibit slavery in the territories?
- What was the immediate political consequence of the Dred Scott decision for the Democratic Party?
- How did the Republican Party respond to the Dred Scott v. Sandford ruling?
- What was the legal status of the 'Slave Power' conspiracy theory after the Dred Scott ruling?