Dred Scott, a slave owned by John Emerson, had been taken by the Emerson
family from Missouri, a slave state, to the free state of Illinois, then to the free
territory of Wisconsin^ ttobaAto Missouri. Scott went to court, claiming that he
should be set free because he had once lived in free territory.

"Hie LLS. Supreme Court did not decide whether spending time in free territory
made a slave free — although that would have been enough to dispose of the case.
Instead, it made the far stronger ruling that Dred Scott did not even have the right to
bring a lawsuit in federal court, because slaves were not citizens of the United States.
The Court went on to add that descendants of slaves — even if they were free — would
aaLbe U.S. citizens.

Here Justice Taney is interpreting the Constitution using the method known as
"original intent." He does not ask whether denying citizenship to black persons is
consistent with the rights declared lathe Constitution; he also does not ask whether
citizenship is required by its broad language. Instead, Justice Taney concludes that
the original authors of the Constitution wanted to exclude slaves from the family of
equals.

Before the Civil War, there was little federal law to rival the power of the

states. But after the war, the Constitution was amended to increase federal power,       <-. J d
^itTT^l

Right, Human Rights and Civil Rights
March 12, 2001                           47