Nope. "It" refers to the U.S. Constitution, Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1 which says, "The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Cirizens in the several states". If persons of the negro race were declared Citizens of any ONE state, then ...
"It" would exempt persons of the negro race from the operation of the special laws ...
"It" would give to persons of the negro race the right to enter every other State ...
"It" would give persons of the negro race the full liberty of speech in public ... and to keep and carry arms wherever they went.
The Dred Scott case pointed out that persons of the negro race were not citizens of anything -- not of the United States and certainly not of any individual state. The 14th amendment, ratified nine years after Dred Scott, made them (small "c") "citizens of the United States" and extended to them some basic privileges and immunities so they at least had some protections.
You're quoting from the Constitution now which only applies to US citizens, "the people", which are the citizens of the several States.
"The Dred Scott case pointed out that persons of the negro race were not citizens of anything "
This is irrelevant. THe whole point is that Taney described the rights of a US citizen, which I pointed out. One was that "the people" refered to in the Constitution are citizens of the US. The other was the right to keep and bear arms as they traveled from State to State.