Rose M. Santos-Cunningham

Law & Business Academy 135 Campus

Rcunnin2@nycboe.net

Introduction

“……..We think they [people of African ancestry] 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 the citizens of the United

States….”

1. Introduction

Please answer the following questions:

1. Do you agree/disagree that the government must protect all people under the 14^th Amendment?

2. If your teacher told you that while you are in a school/playground/or any public place you may not enter because of your ethnic background.

Over the next few weeks you will be studying the Constitution of the United States of America. You will be studying the 14^th Amendment of the Constitution. This amendment speaks of Equal Protection for citizens of the United States. You will read the case DRED SCOTT v. Sanford

http://www.landmarkcases.org/dredscott/home.html

2. Task:

--- You will decide after researching Dred Scott v. Sandford which position you will defend as a Constitutional Lawyer.

--- You will be given two handouts before beginning researching on court case.

--- You will be using CompuLEGAL and other web addresses for references in your research.

--- Summary of cases will be presented

--- Visual examples of the case will be available

--- Argument basis will be presented

--- Judicial decisions of cases will be compared

--- Other available resources

Summary after completing your research you will show your ability to analyze, evaluate, compare and contrast legal issues.

--- After completing your research you and your group will take on the roles of constitutional lawyers defending the rights of a group of students whose Constitutional rights under the 14^th Amendment have been violated or defending the rights of the school and it’s position.

3. Process:

The process will enable you to complete the task given to you for your project. You will research through the websites and other resources concerning Dred Scott v. Stanford. Once this information is gathered you can begin preparing your case for class debate.

--- Use Compulegal to learn about, Dred Scott v. Standford and other related cases, which will help you support, your argument. Also use, other websites listed under the resources to help you obtain additional information about similar cases.

4. Resources:

http://www.maxwell.syr.edu/plegal/scales/glossary.html

http://www.maxwell.syr.edu/plegal/koreweb.html

http://www.maxwell.syr.edu/plegal/scales/dred.html

http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.table.html

Dred Scott v. Sandford 1857

Dred Scott was a slave taken by his master to the Northwest territory

Dred Scott’s owner wanted to move back to the south

Dred Scott claimed he was in a free territory and therefore a free man.

In your group list the arguments that Dred Scott’s defense could use:

1. 3.

2. 4.

In your group list the argument that Stanford use:

1. 3.

2. 4.

Using Compulegal examine the case.

Read the complete Dred Scott v. Standford

POLITCIAL CARTOON

Dred Scott v. Sanford

Superior Court of the United States (1857) Found in favor of Sanford. Declared that African Americans are not citizens and thus have no rights.

Superior Court of the United States (1857) Scott appealed to highest federal court. Scott's attorneys wanted to avoid appealing the Missouri Supreme Court ruling, because the appeal would go directly to the Supreme Court of the United States. The attorneys feared that a majority of the justices would simply endorse the state court decision without considering its merits. They decide to file the case in federal court as a new case and not as an appeal.

U.S. Court for the District of Missouri (1854) Jury decides that Dred Scott and his family were not free.

U.S. Court for the District of Missouri (1854) Sanford had moved to New York, leaving Scott in Missouri. Since federal courts settle disputes between citizens of different states, Scott was able to sue Sanford in federal court as a new case.

Missouri Supreme Court (1852)
Reversed the decision by the circuit court. Dred Scott and his family were not free.

Missouri Supreme Court (1852)
Sanford appealed to a higher state court.

Missouri Circuit Court of St. Louis County (1850) Jury decided that Dred Scott and his family were free.

On behalf of himself, his wife, and his two daughters, Dred Scott sued his owner in state court to win his freedom.

After Researching Dred Scott v. Stanford Where Do You Stand?

Should DRED SCOTT remain free?

Should DRED SCOTT return to his status as a slave?

In depth explain your reasoning.

ConLaw Reading Guide

Click on the Link

http://www.maxwell.syr.edu/plegal/scales/dredreas.html (Fill in the worksheet)

This will clearly summarize your arguments and show contrasting opinions

Dred Scott Decision

The Supreme Court ruled (7-2) that slaves are not citizens, but are the property of their masters and therefore being in a free state did not make Dred Scott a free man. In his decision, Chief Justice Roger B. Taney also ruled that Congress could not declare certain territories free of slavery since it deprived slave-owning citizens of their property. This part of the decision made the Missouri Compromise invalid in the eyes of the Court.

To see the entire Dred Scott v. Sandford decision.

Students’ will give those arguments that were closest to the arguments used in the DRED SCOTT case.

[give at least Four Arguments]

Argument # 1 Argument #3

Argument #2 Argument #4

The Impact on United States History in the 19th Century

After your studies in the History of the Civil War give several ways this case impact on:

Political Impact: Social Impact:

Case on American History

John Brown and his martyrdom

Republican party becomes revitalized

Sectionalism becomes worse

Secession of South Carolina and the Civil war The rise of the abolitionist movement

Homework Assignment

Directions: Using your TIPS worksheets and knowledge of the Constitutional Law case of Dred Scott complete the following:

You are living in 1858. You have read the Dred Scott decision issued by Chief Justice Taney. Write him a letter regarding Your opinion of his decision. You must use facts you have learned from the lesson to prove your point.

You may choose to do a Power Point or Write a ten page type-written paper.

Additional Resources

Handout 1A: EQUAL PROTECTION: RACE

Equal Protection Review

How does the court determine whether policies violate equal protection?

GLOSSARY Or TERMS

Suspect Classification

A category or class of people requiring special protection by the judicial branch of government. The Supreme Court will give special protection where a policy treats people differently because of "race" or "ethnicity." Those are the only two categories recognized as "suspect" by the Supreme Court.

Strict Scrutiny Test

This is the test used in cases that involve a "suspect classification." The Supreme Court will first determine if the state legislature enacted the policy because of a "compelling or overriding state interest." The purpose of the policy must be "extremely" important and not merely reasonable. If the answer is yes, US- statute is "permissible." The Supreme Court will then determine it the policy is the "only way" to attain that compelling state interest and therefore a legal policy. If there is any other way at attaining the compelling state interest without harming the "suspect" class, the policy will be struck down.

Example: During a bitter conflict with Japan in World War II, the state of California set a policy to place American citizens of Japanese ancestry in detention centers. California maintains that the emergency war powers allow them to do whatever is necessary to protect the safety of the American people. Since Japanese-Americans may have loyalties to Japan there is a danger that they might commit acts of espionage and sabotage against the United States if not placed in confinement. Korematsu v. United States, 323 U.S. 214 (1944). (We will consider this case in detail in another lesson.)

The Supreme Court will apply the strict scrutiny test.

The purpose of the policy to protect the safety of the American people is a compelling state interest and the policy is therefore permissible. The policy of placing Japanese-Americans in detention centers is the only way of attaining the compelling state interest and is therefore necessary. The policy will be upheld.

Reasonableness or Rational Relationship Test

This is the test used in cases that do not involve a "suspect classification." The Supreme Court will first determine if the policy has a "reasonable purpose" or "rational basis" for being enacted by the legislature. If the answer is yes, the policy is deemed to be "legitimate." The Supreme Court will then determine if the policy is "reasonably related" to attaining the identified legitimate end. If the answer is yes, the Supreme Court will go no further and the policy will be upheld.

Example: The state of Montana passes a law which allows them to charge more money to out-of-state residents for a hunting license. The law in challenge on equal protection grounds because it treats in-state and out-of-state residents differently even though they are engaged in the same activity. Baldwin v. Fish and Game Commission 436 US 371 (1978).

The Supreme Court will apply the rational relationship test. The purpose of the policy, to protect big game animals in the state is reasonable. The law is therefore legitimate. The policy of charging an additional fee to out-of-state residents for a hunting license is rationally related to attaining the legitimate end.

Adapted & compiled from Black's Law Dictionary by Henry Campbell Black et al 6th edition (1990); Constitutional Law by Nowak and Rotunda, Hornbook Series West Publishing Co., (1995); and Constitutional Law by Gerald Gunther 12th edition (1991).

Handout 1B: EQUAL PROTECTION: RACE

Supreme Court Standards of Review

After reading each case select the proper test and apply it to the case.

Case I: The state of Alabama enacts laws to require racial segregation in prisons. The state argues that the segregation of prisoners helps to maintain security and discipline in the prison population. The law is challenged as a violation of equal protection. Lee v. Washington 390 US 333 (1969).

1. Does this policy involve a suspect classification?
2. Which test will the Court apply?
3. Based on what you learned in Handout 1A, how should the Supreme Court apply the test you selected in question 2?

Case II: In order to maintain a physically fit police departments the State of Massachusetts requires all officers to retire at age 50. It is challenged on the grounds that it violates the equal protection rights of police officers over age 50 who are in good physical condition and able to perform their duties an well as officers under the age of 50. Massachusetts Board of Retirement v. Murgia 427 US 307 (1976)

1. Does this policy involve a suspect classification? (Hint: According to the glossary of terms, is age a suspect classification?)
2. Which test will the Court apply? Based on what you learned in Handout 1A, how should the Supreme Court apply the test you selected in question 2?

Case III: Palmore and Sidoti, both white, are divorced and the parents of a 3 year old daughter. Palmore, the mother, has entered a second marriage to a black man. As a result of the interracial marriage, Palmore lost custody of the child to the father in the lower courts. The court reasoned that it was in the "best interests of the child" to be removed from the social stigma of living with a step-father of another race. Palmore v. Sidoti 466 US 429 (1984).

1. Does this policy involve a suspect classification?
2. Which test will the Court apply?
3. Based on what you learned in Handout 1A, how should the Supreme Court apply the test you selected in question 2?

Case IV: The state of Colorado enacted a provision to the state constitution known as Amendment 2. The amendment prevented the state or any of its cities from adopting laws designed to protect the rights of homosexual men and women. The law was challenged an the grounds that it violates the equal protection of homosexuals. Romer v. Evans 116 S.Ct. 1620 (1996).

1. Does this case involve a suspect classification?
   (Hint: According to the glossary of terms, are homosexuals a suspect classification?)
2. Which test should the Supreme Court apply?
3. Based on what you learned in Handout 1A, how should the Supreme Court apply the test you selected in question 2?