Opinion Paper on Dred Scott’s Case

Name:

Lecturer:

Course:

Date:

Opinion Paper on Dred Scott’s Case

Dred Scott was not an educated man, when he was set free by a jury comprised of white people. He was working for a doctor who later died and Scott was left working for the widowed wife. No sooner had he enjoyed his freedom, than he was returned to slavery. The Supreme Court ruled that he did not deserve to be free; therefore, his freedom was cut short. This man did not give up on getting his freedom so he presented his case in the US Supreme Court. He was not successful because the court did not grant him his wish. In fact, Judge Taney added that a white man is not obliged to respect the rights of a black man.

Other reasons that influenced this decision were the fact that a slave is not a citizen; he or she is considered as property. The constitution protects property ownership of the citizens. The citizens are entitled to their property; therefore, the owner would not lose Scott. The statement made by the judge suggested that black people were not considered meaningless. In my opinion, animals have rights that humans are obliged to respect. Therefore, if white people considered that no one should consider the black people’s rights, then they viewed blacks as non-living objects. It is encouraging to know that this case made the first step in addressing slavery issues and even today, blacks believe that racism will one day be eliminated.

According to Marable and Leith (167), back in the early years, white people considered the African Americans to be inferior. This is because they originated from Africa and they went to America to serve as slaves. This explains why an individual of high authority like the judge made such a statement, depicting that he encouraged racism and slavery. The judge intended to make his ruling and do away with the case but instead, it created a huge controversy in the country. The whites were in support of the Supreme Court but it was different for the blacks. They had been enlightened by the case and though they could not be respected, they learned that they also have rights. I am glad that after this era of ruling, Abraham Lincoln became the president and fought slavery.

Marable and Leith (220) states that the decision made by the judge has never changed even in these current days. Contrary to people’s thoughts, this decision can never change and it is the major reason why there are Civil Rights and Voting Rights Act, which ought to be gone through within a period of a few years. The main determinant, which contributes to this decision being unchangeable, is derived from the Constitutional law. In those days, the black people especially slaves, were not United States’ citizens; hence, the constitution omitted their considerations and concerns until the 14th Amendment was made. In this amendment, a new group of citizens was made and accorded the rights to own and get protection from the federal government. The only document that contains true freedom is the common law because it states that all people have rights granted to them by God and not any human being. I suggest it is important to study the law critically, to comprehend it and not just superficial understanding (Marable and Leith 319).

With reference to the case, there is no race in this world that does not deserve their rights to be respected. Every human being should have freedom and his or her rights observed. Today, people are learned enough to understand that racism is a vice and should be completely wiped off from this world. Sadly, some states in America still practice this vice and they believe white people are superior compared to black people. Additionally, research that has been done proves that race does not determine the anatomy of a human’s brain or intelligence. Therefore, skin color does not mean anything in relation to superiority or inferiority. This is because all human beings have equal chances and opportunity.

Works Cited

Marable, Manning, and Leith Mullings. Let Nobody Turn Us Around. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2003. Print.