Question

Which two of the following statements explain the Court’s ruling in the case?

____a. Under the Constitution slaves could not be citizens.

____b. Slavery was to be prohibited in all new territories.

____c. The Thirteenth Amendment ending slavery was unconstitutional.

____d. Congress had no constitutional authority to ban slavery in territories like Wisconsin.

Will make brainliest

Answer 1

the answer is A under the constitution slaves could not be citizens

Answer 2

In 1957, the Supreme Court ruled in the Dred Scott case that in relation to slavery:

• a. Under the Constitution, enslaved people could not be citizens.
• d. Congress had no constitutional authority to ban slavery in territories like Wisconsin.

Dred Scot was a case in which an enslaved black man known as Dred Scott had sued for his freedom because he had been taken from a state where slavery was allowed to one where it wasn't.

The Supreme Court ruled in this case that black people could not be citizens of the United States regardless of whether they were free or not.

The Supreme Court then went ahead to strike down the Missouri Compromise which had banned slavery in certain territories by saying that Congress did not have the power to do so.

In conclusion, the Dred Scott case was a heavy setback for Black people in the United States that only hardened the resolve of abolitionists.

Find out more at https://brainly.com/question/11492951.