The most direct decision of the Dred Scott decision was that the Supreme Court overturned Dred Scott decision of having a right to become an American citizen.
<h3>What happened in
Dred Scott case?</h3>
Dred Scott v. Sandford entails a fight for Slave right to become a citizen of United State.
- The slave who resides in a free state where slavery was prohibited and was not entitled to freedom to become a Citizen.
- The Supreme Court rule that "No African-Americans could be a citizen in the Free state.
Hence, the most direct decision of the Dred Scott decision was that the Supreme Court overturned Dred Scott decision of having a right to become an American citizen.
Therefore, the Option C is correct.
Read more about Dred Scott case
<em>brainly.com/question/12074767</em>
Technically he could be considered to be a freedman, because Illinois outlawed slavery. However, the Supreme Court ruled that his time spent in Illinois didn't change the fact that he remained a slave after his master died, so he was not empancipated, and thus was still a slave.
The answer is D: He was a slave.
It is<span> brussels sprouts.</span>
It was too profitable not to expand and to cater to the growing population.
Explanation:
USA's white population grew incessantly during the <u>Westward expansion as it was a state sponsored policy to move to the west and displace the indigenous people from their wild but fertile lands.</u> It was simply too profitable for the US to use the land which to them was till now untapped.
<u>There was also no real concern for the life of the native Americans due to the racism prevalent in white America.</u> None of the administrators was really concerned with conservation of their culture.
