Questions regarding the Dred Scott Case?

The high court was divided along regional lines. Chief Justice Roger B. Chaney, son of a wealthy Maryland slave holders, had the final word. He ruled that no free black nor enslaved blacks were U.S. citizens and could not sue in court. Taney went further he ruled the Illinois and Wisconsin baning slavery was unconstitutional. Taney argued because the Missouri Compromise was(he declared) unconstitutional, and according to the Fifth Amendment, barring government from taking "life, liberty, or property" without due process of law, Scott was property that had to be returned to his master's heirs. The U.S. Supreme Court was using the Bill of Rights to deny freedom to a human being. He was property--not a human being. Thus slavery was out beyond compromise. Therefore, nothing short of war was going to end slavery.