Dred Scott v. Sandford | Wikipedia audio article
Channel: wikipedia tts
Date: 2018-12-04

This is an audio version of the Wikipedia Article:
Dred Scott v. Sandford


00:02:04 1 Background
00:05:24 2 Procedural history
00:05:33 2.1 First attempt
00:07:39 2.2 iScott v. Emerson/i
00:09:47 2.3 iScott v. Sanford/i
00:11:31 2.4 Influence of President Buchanan
00:12:48 3 Supreme Court ruling
00:12:58 3.1 Opinion of the Court
00:15:06 3.2 Concurrence by Justice Nelson
00:17:39 3.3 Dissents by Justice Curtis and Justice McLean
00:19:16 4 Consequences
00:19:25 4.1 Economic
00:20:39 4.2 Political
00:22:48 5 Reaction
00:30:53 6 The Scott family's fate
00:32:13 7 Sanford as defendant
00:33:44 8 Later references
00:35:49 9 Legacy
00:36:49 10 See also
00:37:24 11 Notes
00:37:32 12 Further reading
00:39:43 13 External links



Listening is a more natural way of learning, when compared to reading. Written language only began at around 3200 BC, but spoken language has existed long ago.

Learning by listening is a great way to:
- increases imagination and understanding
- improves your listening skills
- improves your own spoken accent
- learn while on the move
- reduce eye strain

Now learn the vast amount of general knowledge available on Wikipedia through audio (audio article). You could even learn subconsciously by playing the audio while you are sleeping! If you are planning to listen a lot, you could try using a bone conduction headphone, or a standard speaker instead of an earphone.

You can find other Wikipedia audio articles too at:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCuKfABj2eGyjH3ntPxp4YeQ

You can upload your own Wikipedia articles through:
https://github.com/nodef/wikipedia-tts



"The only true wisdom is in knowing you know nothing."
- Socrates



SUMMARY
=======
Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. (19 How.) 393 (1857), also known as the Dred Scott case or Dred Scott decision, was a landmark decision by the United States Supreme Court on U.S. labor law and constitutional law. It held that "a negro, whose ancestors were imported into [the U.S.], and sold as slaves," whether enslaved or free, could not be an American citizen, and therefore had no standing to sue in federal court, and that the federal government had no power to regulate slavery in the federal territories acquired after the creation of the United States. Dred Scott, an enslaved man of "the negro African race" who had been taken by his owners to free states and territories, attempted to sue for his freedom. In a 7–2 decision written by Chief Justice Roger B. Taney, the court denied Scott's request. The decision was only the second time that the Supreme Court had ruled an Act of Congress to be unconstitutional.Although Taney hoped that his ruling would settle the slavery question, the decision immediately spurred vehement dissent from anti-slavery elements in the North and proved to be an indirect catalyst for the American Civil War. It was functionally superseded by the Civil Rights Act of 1866 and by the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, adopted in 1868, which gave African Americans full citizenship.
The Supreme Court's decision in Dred Scott v. Sandford is unanimously denounced by modern scholars. Many contemporary lawyers, and most modern legal scholars, consider the ruling regarding slavery in the territories to be obiter dictum and not a binding precedent. Bernard Schwartz says it "stands first in any list of the worst Supreme Court decisions—Chief Justice C. E. Hughes called it the Court's greatest self-inflicted wound." Junius P. Rodriguez says it is "universally condemned as the U.S. Supreme Court's worst decision." Historian David Thomas Konig says it was "unquestionably, our court's worst decision ever."