What was Sandford's argument in the Scott v. Sandford case?

An enslaved person in a free state should be granted freedom.

A person's property cannot be taken away without due process.

Enslaved people should not be considered property.

Enslaved people should have the right to a trial by jury.

Question

Social Studies

Guest

4 February, 21:10

What was Sandford's argument in the Scott v. Sandford case?

An enslaved person in a free state should be granted freedom.

A person's property cannot be taken away without due process.

Enslaved people should not be considered property.

Enslaved people should have the right to a trial by jury.

+1

Answers (1)

Know the Answer?

Gracelyn Keith · Answer 1

Sanford argued that an enslaved person is categorized as property, and under the fifth amendment, a person's property cannot be taken without due process.

So the answer is:

B.) A person's property cannot be taken away without due process

What was Sandford's argument in the Scott v. Sandford case?An enslaved person in a free state should be granted freedom.A person's property cannot be taken away without due process.Enslaved people should not be considered property.Enslaved people should have the right to a trial by jury.

What was Sandford's argument in the Scott v. Sandford case?

An enslaved person in a free state should be granted freedom.

A person's property cannot be taken away without due process.

Enslaved people should not be considered property.

Enslaved people should have the right to a trial by jury.