1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
ozzi
3 years ago
12

How did the Supreme Court rule in the Scott v. Sandford case?

History
2 answers:
PolarNik [594]3 years ago
6 0

<u><em>Answer:</em></u>

A. It ruled 7-2 in favor of Sandford.

<u><em>Explanation:</em></u>

Dred Scott, an oppressed man of "the negro African race" who had been taken by his proprietors to free states and domains, endeavored to sue for his opportunity. In a 7– 2 choice composed by Chief Justice Roger B. Taney, the court denied Scott's ask. The choice was just the second time that the Supreme Court had ruled an Act of Congress to be unlawful.

Volgvan3 years ago
4 0
It ruled 7-2 in favor of Sandford and this was how the Supreme Court rule in the Scott versus Sandford case. The correct option among all the options that are given in the question is the first option or option "A". The chief justice for this case was Roger B. Taney. I hope the answer has helped you.
You might be interested in
Donde los hermanos Wright hicieron el avión
vivado [14]
En Carolina del Norte, y sus modelos en el túnel de viento que habían construido en su taller en Dayton.
5 0
4 years ago
How did the Catholic Church respond to the Protestant Reformation?
Dennis_Churaev [7]
 ...As a response to the Protestant Reformation, the Catholic Church began a program to enact reform from within. The purpose of the Counter/Catholic Reformation was to end corruption, return to traditional teachings, and to strengthen the church in an attempt to stop its members from converting.<span>SO your answer is B</span>
7 0
3 years ago
What two political policies did the south favor for the United States
Harlamova29_29 [7]

Answer:

Southerners argued for states rights and a weak federal government.

Explanation:

It is however possible to give a general perspective behind southern states reasoning.

Slavery is the most apparent example. I won't go into depth because it's been discussed several times. Slavery, on the other hand, had far-reaching and multifaceted consequences in pre-war America. Slavery, for example, became one of the most contentious topics during westward expansion. It was one of the most pressing concerns to be addressed as new territories were established and new states were admitted to the Union. The reason was simple: a balance between slave and free states was required to preserve the Constitution and its amendments.''

The second thing, which is also tied to slavery, are the States rights,especially a right of individual state to seceede from the Union. The political and legal debates about this particular state right are still ongoing. The southern states decided that the matter was important enough to take up arms and fight over it.

Then there are social and economic aspects. The Southern society was extremely aristochratic. This doesn’t mean that in the North there was no aristocracy, but average person in the North had way more oportunities to make a good life. In the South, hard work, witts and ability would lead you only as far as your bloodline would allow it. Before the Civil War, USA politics were dominated by Southern politicians, and there is no better evidence than preservation of slavery which couldn’t be abolished through politics in the Congress.

North and South were also opposites when it comes to production. South’s main cash products were sugar, tobacco and cotton. However they were mostly exported as bulk products and shipped to either North or Europe where other would make a final product that can be sold at much higher cost (like clothes). North started to become more independent from European goods. It still imported a lot of them, but factories and industries were built that aimed to make those same products at home and not to import them from overseas. South was unable to form any substantial industry, apart from cotton gin they never developed any industty aimed at making the final product amd exporting it.

This two reasons esentially made South a reneisance society in industrial revolution world. The average Southener was disgusted by crowded industrial cities of the North, where people lived in conditions that were often worse than what slaves had to endure. The society of the South resisted industrial progres from its very core.

Thanks,

Eddie

6 0
2 years ago
3 examples of English mercantilst trade policies.
Angelina_Jolie [31]
Forbidding colonies to trade with other nations , subsides on export, limiting wages                                     
3 0
4 years ago
One of the co-founders of the NAACP was ?
Kitty [74]

Answer:

W.E.B. Du Bois.

Explanation:

8 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • An apple falling from a tree helped Sir Isaac Newton come up with _____. the Three Laws of Motion the theory of universal gravit
    9·2 answers
  • How did Enlightenment thinkers approach the study of government?..
    10·1 answer
  • Once elected, how did Jefferson handle previous Federalist policies?
    12·2 answers
  • Osama bin laden was best known for
    14·2 answers
  • What does John 3 : 16 say ?
    15·2 answers
  • For each of the following situations, identify the method of competition.
    11·2 answers
  • What was true of the battle of iwo jima?
    10·2 answers
  • HELP ME PLZ WILL MARK YOU AS BRAINLIEST
    7·1 answer
  • Give one word<br><br>the longest period of human past​
    10·1 answer
  • What political movement in the early 1900s finally loosened the Southern Pacific's grip over state politics
    10·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!