Read the excerpt below from the Supreme Court ruling in the Scott v. Sandford.

[Ujhe legislation and histories of the times, and the language used in the Declaration of Independence, show, that

neither the class of persons who had been imported as slaves, nor their descendants, whether they had become free

or not, were then acknowledged as a part of the people.

The main subject of the excerpt is

the lack of citizenship for enslaved people

the practice of importing enslaved people from Africa

the practice of relocating from a slave state to a free state

the right of an owner to retain his or her property.

Question

Jameson Raymond

History

6 December, 16:37

Read the excerpt below from the Supreme Court ruling in the Scott v. Sandford.

[Ujhe legislation and histories of the times, and the language used in the Declaration of Independence, show, that

neither the class of persons who had been imported as slaves, nor their descendants, whether they had become free

or not, were then acknowledged as a part of the people.

The main subject of the excerpt is

the lack of citizenship for enslaved people

the practice of importing enslaved people from Africa

the practice of relocating from a slave state to a free state

the right of an owner to retain his or her property.

+3

Answers (2)

Know the Answer?

Tess Bray · Answer 1

its a

Explanation:

the lack of citizenship for enslaved people.

Amara Pearson · Answer 2

the lack of citizenship for enslaved people

Explanation:

Scott v. Sandford basically argued Whether or not African American were allowed to sue in a federal court.

The constitution only granted that right to sue to the citizens of of United States. But the supreme court ruled that the African American were brought into United States as a form of 'property'. So, they're not considered the African American as 'People' that could gained citizenship.

Therefore, Scott was not allowed to sue in a federal court.