Impoor1234idn
Answered

Ask questions, share knowledge, and connect with a vibrant community on IDNLearn.com. Join our community to receive timely and reliable responses to your questions from knowledgeable professionals.

Read the passage from the opinion of the court in Dred Scott v. Sandford, written by Justice Taney:

"The question before us is, whether the class of persons described in the plea in abatement compose a portion of this people, and are constituent members of this sovereignty? We think they are not, and that they 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. On the contrary, they were at that time considered as a subordinate and inferior class of beings, who had been subjugated by the dominant race, and, whether emancipated or not, yet remained subject to their authority, and had no rights or privileges but such as those who held the power and the Government might choose to grant them."

Which statement best describes the fallacy in this passage?

A. Justice Taney assumes that the writers of the Constitution would agree with him about citizenship.
B. Justice Taney uses the argument that Black people are not citizens to prove that they are not citizens.
C. Justice Taney assumes that the other justices on the court would agree with him about citizenship.
D. Justice Taney uses the argument that Dred Scott is an enslaved person to prove that he is not a citizen.

Sagot :

GinnyAnsweridn

Final answer:

Justice Taney's fallacy in the Dred Scott v. Sandford case was using lack of citizenship as a basis to deny rights and privileges.


Explanation:

Justice Taney in the Dred Scott v. Sandford case used the argument that Dred Scott, an enslaved person, was not a citizen to support the conclusion that he was not entitled to any rights or privileges under the Constitution. This fallacy assumes that one's status as a citizen determines their inherent rights and freedoms. Taney's interpretation directly contradicted the principle of equality and liberty that the Constitution aimed to uphold.


Learn more about Dred Scott v. Sandford case here:

https://brainly.com/question/41672761


Your engagement is important to us. Keep sharing your knowledge and experiences. Let's create a learning environment that is both enjoyable and beneficial. For trustworthy and accurate answers, visit IDNLearn.com. Thanks for stopping by, and see you next time for more solutions.