Question

In the case of Dred Scott v. Sandford, the United States Supreme Court ruled that-

A.slaves in new territories could be granted citizenship
B.the Fugitive Slave Act was unconstitutional
C.the extension of slavery into new territories was lawful
D.Abraham Lincoln won the presidential election of 1860

Answer 1

C. The extension of slavery into new territories was lawful.

Step-by-step explanation:

The 1857 court case of Dred Scott v. Sandford was a result of an enslaved man named Dred Scott and his 'right' to be a free man after being brought back to his original state from a free state. The court decided that his implication is wrong and that the constitutional right of citizenship does not include African Americans, slaves, or free.

Dred Scott was taken from Missouri, a slave state to the states of Illinois and Wisconsin territory where slavery is illegal by his masters. Scott was then taken back to Missouri when he filed a petition that he should be freed, considering they had arrived from a slave-free state. The Court ruled that it is lawful for the practice of slavery to extend to states or areas where it is deemed illegal and that Scott is and will remain a slave.

Thus, the correct answer is option C.