Which statement best serves as a counterclaim to the claim in this passage?

Read the passage from the opinion of the court in Dred Scott v. Sandford, written by Justice Taney.

It will be observed, that the plea applies to that class of persons only whose ancestors were negroes of the African race, and imported into this country, and sold and held as slaves. The only matter in issue before the court, therefore, is, whether the descendants of such slaves, when they shall be emancipated, or who are born of parents who had become free before their birth, are citizens of a State, in the sense in which the word "citizen" is used in the Constitution of the United States. . . .

. . . The question before us is, whether the class of persons described in the plea in abatement compose a portion of this people, and are constituent members of this sovereignty? We think they are not, and that they are not included, and were not intended to be included, under the word "citizens" in the Constitution, and can therefore claim none of the rights and privileges which that instrument provides for and secures to citizens of the United States.

Which statement best describes an effective counterclaim to the claim in this passage?

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?

Read the passage from the opinion of the court in Dred Scott v. Sandford, written by Justice Taney.

The question before us is, whether the class of persons described in the plea in abatement compose a portion of this people, and are constituent members of this sovereignty? We think they are not, and that they are not included, and were not intended to be included, under the word "citizens" in the Constitution, and can therefore claim none of the rights and privileges which that instrument provides for and secures to citizens of the United States. On the contrary, they were at that time considered as a subordinate and inferior class of beings, who had been subjugated by the dominant race, and, whether emancipated or not, yet remained subject to their authority, and had no rights or privileges but such as those who held the power and the Government might choose to grant them.

Which statement best serves as a counterclaim to the claim in this passage?

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?

The court thinks the affirmative of these propositions cannot be maintained. And if it cannot, the plaintiff in error could not be a citizen of the State of Missouri, within the meaning of the Constitution of the United States, and, consequently, was not entitled to sue in its courts.

What claim does Justice Taney make in this passage?

Read the passage from the opinion of the court in Dred Scott v. Sandford, written by Justice Taney.

Upon the whole, therefore, it is the judgment of this court, that it appears by the record before us that the plaintiff in error is not a citizen of Missouri, in the sense in which that word is used in the Constitution; and that the Circuit Court of the United States, for that reason, had no jurisdiction in the case, and could give no judgment in it. Its judgment for the defendant must, consequently, be reversed, and a mandate issued, directing the suit to be dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

What claim does Taney make in this passage?

Read the passage from the opinion of the court in Dred Scott v. Sandford, written by Justice Taney.

The question before us is, whether the class of persons described in the plea in abatement compose a portion of this people, and are constituent members of this sovereignty? We think they are not, and that they are not included, and were not intended to be included, under the word "citizens" in the Constitution, and can therefore claim none of the rights and privileges which that instrument provides for and secures to citizens of the United States. On the contrary, they were at that time considered as a subordinate and inferior class of beings, who had been subjugated by the dominant race, and, whether emancipated or not, yet remained subject to their authority, and had no rights or privileges but such as those who held the power and the Government might choose to grant them.

What type of logical error underlies the argument that African Americans were inferior?

Which statement best serves as a counterclaim to the claim in this passage Taney fails to?

Which statement best serves as a counterclaim to the claim in this passage? Taney fails to provide any actual evidence for his statements that African Americans were universally considered inferior.

What claim does Justice Taney make in this passage that Sanford?

In this passage Justice Taney made a claim that Dred Scott, was not an individual in the eyes of law. Legally speaking Dred Scott was treated as a property which was distinct from him. This case could have been heard in a federal court or a state court, then both these courts will have concurrent jurisdiction.

What is the difference between a Supreme Court opinion and a Supreme Court dissent quizlet?

An opinion is a Supreme Court decision that the majority of the judges agree with, while a dissent disagrees with the decision. An opinion is a Supreme Court summary of the case, while a dissent is the final decision made on the case.