peachysupreme
contestada

WILL GIVE BRAINLIEST) What was the argument in the dred Scott case?

A) dred should have been aloud to run for president because he was a citizen

B) dred should have been free because he had lived in a free territory

C) dred should be aloud to return to slavery if he chose who.

D) dred should have been able to vote because he had lived in a free territory

Respuesta :

oopfloop2

B

i thought it was a choose twoi lol

Answer:

B) dred should have been free because he had lived in a free territory

Explanation:

The Dred Scott decision was the Supreme Court's ruling on the sixth of March, 1857, that living in a free state and on territory did not entitle a slave, Dred Scott, to his freedom. the decision argued that as a slave Scott was not a citizen and could not sue in a federal court.

Otras preguntas