Question

question 1-45. in the passage below is from the u.s. supreme court decision in dred scott v sandford (1857). we find that african americans 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 citizens of the united states. the only two clauses in the constitution which point to them show that they were not even contemplated as members of the political community formed and brought into existence by that instrument, but were regarded merely as property. based on the summary, what did the supreme court conclude? african americans should seek justice in the state courts rather than in federal courts. the court has no jurisdiction over the case because an african american has no right to sue in federal court. the practice of slavery clearly violates the u.s. constitution, but african americans still have no rights in court. african americans have a right to file lawsuits in northern states, where slavery is prohibited, but not in southern states, where slavery is permitted.

Explanation:

The Dred - Scott v. Sandford (1857) decision by the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that African Americans, whether enslaved or free, were not considered citizens under the U.S. Constitution and thus had no right to sue in federal court. The Court claimed that African Americans were not intended to be included under the word "citizens" in the Constitution.

Answer:

C. The Court has no jurisdiction over the case because an African American has no right to sue in federal court.