Taney held that the Missouri Compromise was unconstitutional, marking the first time since the 1803 case "Marbury v. Madison" that the Supreme Court had struck down a federal law, though the Missouri Compromise had already been effectively overridden by the Kansas–Nebraska Act. Because the Compromise exceeded the scope of Congress powers and was unconstitutional, Taney wrote, Dred Scott was still a slave regardless of his time spent in the parts of the Northwest Territory that were north of 36°N and did not allow slavery. Therefore, he was still a slave under Missouri law, and the Court had to follow Missouri law in the matter. For all these reasons, the Court concluded, Dred Scott could not bring suit in U.S. federal court.