# data[].attributes.body
Dred Scott was a slave in Missouri. From 1833 to 1843, he resided in Illinois (a free state) and in the Louisiana Territory, where slavery was forbidden by the Missouri Compromise of 1820. After returning to Missouri, Scott filed suit in Missouri court for his freedom, claiming that his residence in free territory made him a free man. After losing, Scott brought a new suit in federal court. Scott's master maintained that no “negro” or descendant of slaves could be a citizen in the sense of Article III of the Constitution.

# data[].attributes.body
Chief Justice:
Roger Taney
Associate justices: (from left to right excluding Taney)

James M. Wayne

John McLean

John Catron

justice Daniel

Samuel nelson

Robert Cooper Grier

Benjamin Robins Curtis

Justice Campbell

# data[].attributes.body
Dred Scott argued that when a slave resides in a free state, freedom is entitled to him and cannot be revoked if he returns to a slave state. Also, they argued that Negroes of African descent could be United States citizens.

Respondent argument
The court argued that argued that, as someone's property, Scott was not a citizen and could not sue in a federal court.

# data[].attributes.body
The Dred Scott Case can be seen as both Judicial activism and judicial restraint. Since Scott was the first slave to  try to get granted full citizenship in that manner. Justice Taney ruled that Scott could not become a resident of a state or territory without first being a citizen.  Because there was then no legal precedent to support Scott’s claim to freedom on the basis given, judicial restraint prevented Taney from granting it.

It can also be viewed as judicial activism aswell since Judge Taney declared that the Missouri Compromise was unconstitutional. It states that Maine to the United States as a free state, simultaneously with Missouri as a slave state, thus maintaining the balance of power between North and South in the US Senate.

# data[].attributes.body
The case persisted through several courts and ultimately reached the U.S. Supreme Court, whose decision incensed abolitionists, gave momentum to the anti-slavery movement and served as a stepping stone to the Civil War.

# data[].attributes.body
Dissenting opinion authored by Justice Benjamin Curtis
I dissent, therefore, from that part of the opinion of the majority of the court, in which it is held that a person of African descent cannot be a citizen of the United States; and I regret I must go further, and dissent both from what I deem their assumption of authority to examine the constitutionality of the act of Congress commonly called the Missouri compromise act, and the grounds and conclusions announced in their opinion…

Concurring opinion
I couldn't find any concurring opinions probably because nobody was really in agreed with it

# data[].attributes.body
The majority held that “a negro, whose ancestors were imported into [the U.S.], and sold as slaves,” whether enslaved or free, could not be an American citizen and therefore did not have standing to sue in federal court. Because the Court lacked jurisdiction, Taney dismissed the case on procedural grounds.

# data[].attributes.body
In November 1853, Scott filed a federal lawsuit with the United States Circuit Court for the District of Missouri. On May 15, 1854, the federal court heard Dred Scott v. Sandford and ruled against Scott, holding him and his family in slavery.