In the Scott v. Sandford case, Sandford argued that

Sandford argued that Dred Scott was enslaved and therefore legally property, not a citizen entitled to sue in federal court. He also relied on the claim that enslaved people were property protected by the Constitution’s due-process clause, so the government could not take that property away. Thus, the best answer is “a person’s property can’t be taken away without due process.”

AI-written and checked against the verified answer.