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

Upon the whole, therefore, it is the judgment of this court, that it appears by the record before us that the plaintiff in error is not a citizen of Missouri, in the sense in which that word is used in the Constitution; and that the Circuit Court of the United States, for that reason, had no jurisdiction in the case, and could give no judgment in it. Its judgment for the defendant must, consequently, be reversed, and a mandate issued, directing the suit to be dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
Which statement most accurately states the claim in this passage?

1. Citizens of Missouri cannot sue in a court of the United States.

2. Dred Scott cannot sue in court because he is not a citizen.

3. Sanford should not have won the previous case in circuit court.

4.The Constitution’s definition of citizenship does not include Missouri.

Number 3

Explanation:

The passage starts off with talking about judgment of the court but it cannot placed in court because the plaintiff is not a us citizentiff

glamis thou art, and cawdor; and shalt be what thou art promis'd; yet do i fear thy nature; it is too full o' the milk of human kindness to catch the nearest way: thou wouldst be great; art not without ambition; but without the illness should attend it. what thou wouldst highly, that wouldst thou holily; wouldst not play false, and yet wouldst wrongly win: thou'dst have, great glamis, that which cries, "thus thou must do, if thou have it: and that which rather thou dost fear to do than wishest should be undone." hie thee hither, that i may pour my spirits in thine ear; and chastise with the valor of my tongue all that impedes thee from the golden round, which fate and metaphysical aid doth seem to have thee crown'd withal.  

he lacks ambition.  

he is hesitant.  

he lacks courage.  

he has moral scruples.