Question

a free negro of the african race, whose ancestors were brought to this country and sold as slaves, is not a \citizen\ within the meaning of the constitution of the united states. when the constitution was adopted, they were not regarded in any of the states as members of the community which constituted the state, and were not numbered among its \people or citizens.\ consequently, the special rights and immunities guarantied to citizens do not apply to them. and not being \citizens\ within the meaning of the constitution, they are not entitled to sue in that character in a court of the united states, and the circuit court has not jurisdiction in such a suit.
--dred scott v. sandford,
supreme court of the united states
which details does taney use as evidence to support his reasoning? check all that apply.
□ \a free negro of the african race\
□ \whose ancestors were brought to this country and sold as slaves\
□
ot a citizen within the meaning of the constitution of the united states\
□ \they were not regarded in any of the states as members of the community\
□
ot numbered among its people or citizens\

Explanation:

To determine the evidence Taney uses, we analyze each option:

• "A free negro of the African race" is a description of the group, not evidence for reasoning.
• "whose ancestors were brought to this country and sold as slaves" provides background but not direct evidence for why they aren't citizens.
• "not a 'citizen' within the meaning of the Constitution of the United States" is the conclusion, not evidence.
• "they were not regarded in any of the States as members of the community" is evidence showing how states viewed them, supporting the claim they aren't citizens.
• "not numbered among its 'people or citizens'" is evidence showing they weren't considered part of the citizenry, supporting the claim.

Answer:

D. "they were not regarded in any of the States as members of the community"
E. "not numbered among its 'people or citizens'"