Question

Read the passage from the opinion of the court in Dred Scott v. Sandford, written by Justice Taney. The question then arises, whether the provisions of the Constitution, in relation to the personal rights and privileges to which the citizen of a State should be entitled, embraced the negro African race, at that time in this country, or who might afterwards be imported, who had then or should afterwards be made free in any State; and to put it in the power of a single State to make him a citizen of the United States, and endue him with the full rights of citizenship in every other State without their consent? Does the Constitution of the United States act upon him whenever he shall be made free under the laws of a State, and raised there to the rank of a citizen, and immediately clothe him with all the privileges of a citizen in every other State, and in its own courts? Which statement could best be used as an effective counterclaim to this claim?
A. States should decide who is free and who is not.
B. A person who is free in one state cannot be a citizen.
C. Taney cannot deny Scott citizenship because it is a federal right.
D. Other states should have a say over one state's decision.

Answer 1

Answer:

C. Taney cannot deny Scott citizenship because it is a federal right.

Explanation:

The Constitution decides citizenship because it is a federal right. Citizenship is for the entire nation not just a single state therefore it cannot be determined by each state individually. In this passage, it debates on the rights of a citizen as determined by each state individually.

Answer 2

its C i just took the quizzzzzz