What did the Supreme Court decide in the Dred Scott case?

Did the Court do too much in its ruling or was it within its traditional Constitutional boundaries?

With the ruling that decimated the rights of blacks and reopened slavery to all of the United States, the Supreme Court stretched its powers too far in assuming the right to overturn citizenship of previously accepted nationals but in limiting Congresss decision on slavery, found legal backing. The Supreme Court ruled, in along with Dred Scotts fate, the fate of all other blacks in the United States. It laid out that they could never gain citizenship and were to be considered permanent property, children included. They could not be taken away from their owners without due process of law, essentially giving them the legal qualities of any piece of furniture. Additionally, because they were not citizens, they could not sue in the courts. With regards to federal law, the Court ruled that no law can be passed hindering the movement of slaves, as they were property. Unbelievably immoral, the decision was close to being within the bounds of the Supreme Court, which had vaguely written powers and was consistently expanding them. The Supreme Court has the ability to grant or deny citizenship to individuals, but not entire classes of people. This would have to be delegated to congress, which would have to draft a law specifically revoking and denying citizenship. However, in the ruling that slavery could not be denied in states, the Court was acting within its bounds, as it was determined the Compromise was unconstitutional, which is clearly evinced as a legal way for a law to be struck down. In the Constitution, property was to be protected, and not denied in any fashion, and so the error lies in that blacks were considered

property, not that property could be restricted. This also applies to that slaves could not be taken away without due process of law. This is perfectly legal, if slaves were considered property, and at which point discretion decides the ruling. Although the Supreme Court could not have ruled out the citizenship for an entire group of people, it was legally ruling when preventing the Missouri Compromise and like impediments to slavery.