B is the correct answer. When looking at these answers, you have to think about whether or not this seems like something that would have been one of the goals of the women’s right movement.
With answer A, it’s unclear. This could be related to women’s rights, but considering that gender or women are not mentioned, it’s unlikely.
With answer B, it is clear that this is about gender equality, which is what specifically the women’s rights movement was fighting for. This answer is correct.
With answers C and D, it is similar to answer A. Both are improvements to equality, but are not gender or women specific, so it is unlikely that is was done by the women’s rights movement.
Answer:
i think its outspoken but eh
The Dred Scott vs. Sandford case was monumental in America, as it stated that slaves had no rights which their owners were bound to respect. Along with this, it also stated that slaves are property and can be brought into free states.
This case causes significant divide between the nation. The southern states and those individuals with slaves see this as a victory, as they can now take their slaves wherever they want without the fear of these individuals becoming free men. On the other hand, abolitionists and states who outlawed slavery are furious. This is because they now have to allow slave owners to keep their slaves in a state where they do not want slavery. This case resulted in a bigger divide between those for slavery and those against slavery.
<span><span>
</span></span>C. Is the answer hopes this helps
