Final answer:
The expansion of slavery into new territories was an issue related to state rights versus federal rights. The debate centered around whether the federal government had the authority to regulate or restrict slavery's spread. Compromises like the Missouri Compromise and Kansas-Nebraska Act attempted to address this issue, but the conflict over slavery expansion was a key factor in the lead up to the Civil War.
Step-by-step explanation:
The expansion of slavery into new territories was indeed related to the issue of state rights versus federal rights. The debate revolved around whether or not the federal government had the authority to regulate or restrict the spread of slavery into new areas. Supporters of state rights believed that individual states should be able to decide whether to allow or prohibit slavery within their borders, while proponents of federal rights argued that the federal government should have the power to prevent the expansion of slavery into new territories.
For example, the Missouri Compromise of 1820 and the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 were both attempts to address the issue of slavery expansion while also dealing with the question of state versus federal power. These compromises attempted to balance the interests of both slaveholding and non-slaveholding states while also considering the question of who had the authority to make decisions regarding slavery in new territories.
Ultimately, the expansion of slavery into new territories became a major point of contention leading up to the American Civil War. The conflict between state rights and federal rights played a significant role in shaping the debate around slavery and ultimately contributed to the division of the nation.
Learn more about Expansion of slavery into territories and state rights versus federal rights