Cherokee Nation versus Georgia
In the Indian Removal Act, there were three sides to whether or not the Cherokee Nation should have their land taken from them. There was the state of Georgia, the Supreme Court, and the Cherokee Nation. In the end, it was up to the Supreme Court to decide if the Cherokee Nation was a foreign state or not, but this did not stop the state of Georgia as well as the Cherokee Nation from expressing their views on why or why not the Cherokee Nation should be considered a foreign nation.
Georgia believed that the Cherokee Nation was not a part of the United States. Since they were foreigners, in their eyes, the Courts should not be hearing the case. With this belief, according to Georgia, the Cherokee Nation had no
…show more content…
One such treaty was “Treaty Hopewell”. This treaty said that the U.S. managed trades and other business affairs. It also stated that the Cherokee Nations were allowed to send a deputy to congress [McBride]. The Cherokee did not consider itself foreign because when it came to their maps, laws, history, and discourses, they were known to be a part of the super visional limits of the U.S.
Whether or not the Court thought Georgia should clear the Cherokee out, let alone hear the case, proved to be difficult. The Courts were trying to figure out if the Cherokee Nation was a legible party to sue. The issue faced with this case all comes down to the previously stated: Is the Cherokee Nation a foreign state, or is it a part of the Untied States. The answer according to the Supreme Court determines if the Eleventh Amendment takes place and if the Courts could hear the case, or if they had any jurisdiction.
In the end, the Court deemed that the Cherokee Nation was indeed a dependent nation amongst the U.S. and did not hear the case. The conclusion came from Article III of the U.S. Constitution. Thus article viewed the Native American tribes as “denominated domestic dependent nation”, and not a sovereign nation
When it was all said and done the Supreme Court ruled with the Federal government because they believed the Cherokees has the right to their national territory
Many said stay, many said go, and some said they shouldn’t have to follow Georgia’s laws at all. The evidence shows that they should stay and fight back because they have a lot of history on their land. One reason on why the Cherokee people should stay is because their land was passed down to them from their ancestors. The representatives of the Cherokee nation state, “Our fathers passed down
Whereas twenty-one Cherokees signed away all the Cherokee land east of the Mississippi river without any of Cherokee Council having signed the document or even having taken part in the drafting of the treaty, we the Cherokee Nation Are asking for a review of the circumstances of the treaty. This Treaty of New Echota was engineered by one John Ridge and supported by John F. Schimmerhorn is not supported by the Majority of the Cherokee Peoples. The monetary offering of $4.5 million to leave Georgia peacefully however generous, will not benefit the Cherokee Nation but will most likely fill the pockets of the drafters of this treaty. I am aware of the injustice of United States policy toward my people and hold out the hope that
Often history lessons debate the ruling between the United States Supreme Court and the Cherokee Nation. In 1831 Chief Justice John Marshall deemed the Cherokee Nation a “ward to its guardian”. Chief Justice Marshall pointed to Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution as evidence; separated "foreign nations" and "Indian tribes" because they did not consider the Indian nations as either foreign or independent. [1] Since the Cherokee were not a foreign state, he concluded, the Court had no original jurisdiction powers, and so it could not grant the injunction that the Cherokee desired.
The document “Thomas Jefferson and the American Indian Nations: Native American Sovereignty and the Marshall Court” is a historical journal article written in 2006. It was published in the thirty first volume of the Journal of Supreme Court History, a popular historical journal focusing on the history and actions of the Supreme Court. It was written by Stephen G. Bragaw, Ph.D., a Visiting Professor of Politics at Washington and Lee University. He has published numerous articles and papers, and has extensive experience in American History and Politics. The Journal of Supreme Court History is a historical journal that is very popular among historians, those interested in the history of the Supreme Court, and most likely also modern politicians
During the earliest years of the United States when the US Constitution was written, the Founding Fathers addressed the Native Americans living on the land the earliest in Article 1, Section 8. “Congress shall have power to regulate Commerce with foreign nations...and with the Indian tribes.” (U.S. Const. Art. I, Sect. 8.)
The Indian Removal Bill, supported by President Andrew Jackson, was cordially challenged by the Cherokee in what became a Supreme Court case. The Court ruled in favor of the Cherokee and declared that the state laws of Georgia had no jurisdiction of the Cherokee. However, the Treaty of New Echota signed by Major Ridge (not the Cherokee leader at the time-John Ross was) which led to the eventual eviction of the Cherokee. Their battle was one of formality and progressiveness yet was not ultimately
All that the Cherokees wanted was the liberty to remain in the land that they had been inhabiting for generations. Instead, they were tossed around like dolls by the U.S. The Native Americans stood up for themselves and the rules that the U.S. was founded on, yet they got punished. This letter from the Cherokee nation shares the same
Being in the middle of the South, the Creek Indians were surrounded by plantation owners and frontiersmen on all sides along with the Cherokee Indians. Being surrounded on all sides, they were in constant conflict with white protestors and squatters who believed they had a right to settle and obtain Indian land. The squatters did this with no actual approval, but a belief in Georgia is sovereign, and was not. The problem is that Georgia failed to recognize that the Creeks had proclaimed themselves their own sovereign state. But Georgia believed that the United States Constitution made this null and void.
I, Michelle Benitez representative of Everett’s Law Firm, am here on the behalf of my wrongly accused client, President Andrew Jackson. In 1838, our Cherokee brothers and sisters were tore away from their native land; were forced to walk thousands of miles to an Indian Reservation Land. Our nation was inflicted a difficult decision; my client, Mr. Jackson, responded with the Indian Removal Act. From these course of actions, President Jackson was now recently accused of murder for all our deceased Cherokee brothers and sisters. Presidents prior to Mr. Jackson, my client, were imposed this burdensome decision of the Indian’s Removal.
The courts of Georgia agreed with the Cherokees and passed a ruling that they Cherokee Indians were not required to move. President Jackson overruled this ruling and sent armed
The Cherokees lost. The Cherokees felt cheated in the Georgia state court, so they appealed to the Supreme Court. John Marshal is the Chief Justice, and the Cherokees win. However, Georgia’s not done, they
The Georgia state laws made it so that Cherokees could not defend their land claims, and report the white men trespassing their land. It stated that the Cherokees had no right to sue or testify whites in court. This law, passed in 1828, took away many of the Cherokee’s rights. Due to the crazy, lawless gold frenzy, Chief John Ross, asked President Jackson to at least cover the money of the gold digger’s intrusions. The Cherokee focus on the discovery of gold, however, seemed to only enhance the Georgia legislature to argue that the Cherokee tribe was depriving the state unfairly, of their wealth.
On July 17, 1830, the Cherokee nation published an appeal to all of the American people. United States government paid little thought to the Native Americans’ previous letters of their concerns. It came to the point where they turned to the everyday people to help them. They were desperate. Their withdrawal of their homeland was being caused by Andrew Jackson signing the Indian Removal Act into law on May 28, 1830.
In the book, The Cherokee Removal, Perdue and Green argue that the Cherokee Nation was treated unfairly by the U.S. Government in the 1800s. The majority of Americans were not fond of the Native Americans, and the Americans felt as if the Native Americans were on their rightfully owned property. Perdue and Green display how the states were trying to remove the Natives when they write, “A state could use its legal institutions to make life for Indians so miserable that they would gladly sell their lands and flee to the West” (Perdue and Green, 73).