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

> The question before us is, whether the class of persons described in the plea in abatement compose a portion of this people, and are constituent members of this sovereignty? We think they are not, and that they are not included, and were not intended to be included, under the word "citizens" in the Constitution, and can therefore claim none of the rights and privileges which that instrument provides for and secures to citizens of the United States. On the contrary, they were at that time considered as a subordinate and inferior class of beings, who had been subjugated by the dominant race, and, whether emancipated or not, yet remained subject to their authority, and had no rights or privileges but such as those who held the power and the Government might choose to grant them.

Which statement best serves as a counterclaim to the claim in this passage?

A. Taney fails to provide any actual evidence for his statements that Black people were universally considered inferior.

B. Taney cannot use states' rights to claim that the plaintiff is not a citizen, because citizenship is federal.

C. Taney's argument that emancipated people were still controlled by White people is false because they were free.

D. Taney's argument that Blacks were not citizens is false because their ancestors were forced to come here.