Question

which statement best counters justice taney’s argument regarding the dred scott case? a state can introduce a new member into the political community. one of citizens’ constitutional rights is the right to sue in court. being born in the united states makes you a citizen of the united states. the terms \people of the united states\ and \citizens\ mean the same thing.

Explanation:

Justice Taney's argument in the Dred Scott case held that African Americans (enslaved or free) were not citizens and could not sue in federal court. The statement "Being born in the United States makes you a citizen of the United States" counters this by asserting a basis for citizenship (birthright citizenship) that would include individuals Taney excluded, directly challenging his view on who qualifies as a US citizen. The other options either relate to state - level political community introduction, the right to sue (which Taney argued non - citizens didn't have), or equating "people" and "citizens" (not a direct counter to the citizenship basis of his argument).

Answer:

C. Being born in the United States makes you a citizen of the United States.