This I know, but why didn't Scott have the standing to sue? Could it be that Chief Justice Taney, who was a staunch supporter of slavery, thought that black people "had no rights which the white man was bound to respect; and that the negro might justly and lawfully be reduced to slavery for his benefit. He was bought and sold and treated as an ordinary article of merchandise and traffic, whenever profit could be made by it?"
Now, what is your thought on this decision and Taney's words?
