Question

Can someone give me a REAL answer pls:)

Answer 1

Answer:

Scott was considered as property that could not be taken from its owner.

Explanation:

In the way this ruling was written, Dred Scott didn't have the right to sue in a Missouri's courts, since he wasn't considered a citizen.

Section C also basically states the the Missouri Compromise was unconstitutional and was considered void, as it deprived a US citizen of their property, which is what slaves were considered as at the time.