In dred scott’s court case, scott argued he should be free because he had lived in

In dred Scott’s court case, Scott argued he should be free because he had lived in  Illinois and Wisconsin.

Explanation:

Dred Scott was a slave who unsuccessfully sued for his freedom in the famous Dred Scott v. Sandford trial. His lawsuit was based on the fact that he and his wife Harriet had lived in states and territories where slavery was prohibited, including Illinois and parts of the Louisiana Purchase. The court ruled against Scott by 7-2 votes, on the grounds that slaves were property and that owners of their property should not be disposed of, except through a rule of law intervention (5th Amendment to the Constitution). Another reason was that in order to be able to file a lawsuit, American citizenship was required. At the time, however, black slaves were viewed as the private property of their owners and therefore had no right to citizenship. This process was an important step in the chain of events that led to the Civil War.

5xxgm4a77dg128164 look this up plz

if you are going to ask a question give options..