Question

PLZZZZZZ FAST!!! MUCH APRECIATION!! In the Scott v. Sandford case, Sandford argued that an enslaved person in a free state should be granted freedom. a person’s property can’t be taken away without due process. enslaved workers should not be considered property. enslaved workers should have the right to a trial by jury.

Answer 1

a person’s property can’t be taken away without due process.

Answer 2

Answer: A person’s property can’t be taken away without due process.

Step-by-step explanation:

Dred Scott v. John F.A. Sandford (1857) was a legal case in which the Supreme Court, following Sandford´s claim, ordered that Dred Scott, a slave who had lived in a state where slavery was forbidden, had no right to freedom. It was also stated that African Americans could never become citizens and that the Missouri Compromise (1820) was unconstitutional.

This ruling worsened the sectional dispute, in a path to civil war.