Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
Cherokee mation v. georgia
Cherokee native american history
Cherokee native american history
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Cherokee mation v. georgia
Cherokee native american history
Cherokee native american history
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Coker V. Georgia is a supreme court case that took place in 1977. Ehrlich Anthony Coker also known as Coker, was already serving multiple life sentences for rape, murder, assault, and kidnapping. (https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/433/584/case.html) But Coker escaped through the roof of a building where a meeting was being held on September 2. (https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/433/584/case.html).
The Supreme Court took the case of Missouri v. Seibert, on the writ of certiorari to the supreme court of Missouri. The case looks whether custodial interrogations without first giving Miranda warning of the right to remain silent and right to counsel would have produced the same confession. In the case of Missouri v. Seibert, Patrice Siebert was found guilty and convicted of second murder of Donald Rector. The confession that was given was before she was read her Miranda warning and then repeated after the warning had been given.
The case of Tennessee v. Garner was brought to the Supreme Court in 1985. The overview is as follows. One unspecified day in 1984 at approximately 22:45 Memphis Tennessee police were dispatched to answer a “prowler inside call”. Upon arrival on scene they saw a woman standing on her porch and motioning toward an adjacent house. The woman stated she had heard glass breaking and that someone was breaking and entering the house.
In the case of Tennessee vs Garner 471 US 1 1985 Edward Garner a 15 year old young man broke into a house, he was found hiding outside in the backyard by responding Officer Elton Hymen. Gardner made a fatal decision to flee even after being ordered by the police to stop, Garner tried to climb a six foot fence at that point officer Hymen shot and killed Garner. In this case the U.S. Supreme Court declared the “Fleeing Felon Doctrine” unconstitutional in that it violated the Fourth Amendment in that it was an unreasonable seizure. In Justice White delivery of the Courts opinion they “conclude that such force may not be used unless it is necessary to prevent the escape and the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant
Being one of the more “advanced” tribes, the Cherokee thought early about making sure they could do everything possible to create preventative measures against having their land taken away. Before there was a more serious federal discussion on removing the tribe, they were working hard to becoming a more “civilized” group of people to become more accepted by regular Americans and to better themselves. In order to both help their case and further the process of becoming civilized, they set up a constitution which closely resembled that of the US Constitution. In the Cherokee Constitution, it allowed them to set up an actual border around their territory and set up a government, both which were signs of earlier resistance against their removal
This issue came under the Supreme Court in two separate cases related to the declarations of the Cherokee nation (Keene, 244). In both cases, Cherokee Nation v. Georgia and Worcester v. Georgia, the Supreme Court ruled that Indians tribes had the right to govern themselves, as well as other rights typically associated with sovereign nations, but they did not have the right to sue the state of Georgia (Keene, 244). In the case, Worcester v. Georgia, Georgia had imprisoned two protestant missionaries because they were living on Indian land without a license. Chief Justice John Marshall determined that these missionaries were wrongfully imprisoned and that they were qualified for protection from the federal courts. Even more important, the Cherokee received an important triumph when Marshall supported that “the laws of Georgia can have no force” when it comes to Cherokee territory (Keene, 244).
Gregg V Georgia Background of the Case Troy Gregg was found guilty and was charged in 1976, these charges included murder and armed robbery and he was sentenced to death. He murdered Fred Edward Simmons and Bob Durwood Moore. Fred and Bob gave Troy Gregg and another man a ride because Troy appeared to be hitchhiking. Gregg then shot both men and continued to rob them.
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.
This clearly shows that there was political bias and the state government was acting reactively instead of acting proactively and looking at the losses the Cherokees would face. This then instigated the case Cherokee Nation v. Georgia. In June 1830, a delegation of Cherokee led by John Ross and William Wirt, attorney general in the Monroe Administration, were selected to obtain a federal injunction against laws that were passed by the Georgia state legislature depriving them of their rights within the state borders (“Cherokee Nation v. Georgia”). They claimed that Georgia created laws that “go directly to annihilate the Cherokees as a political society,” and since they were a foreign government, Georgia’s laws were not legally binding to them. As a counter, Georgia was trying to make the point that the Cherokee Nation was not a foreign government because they did not have
The Cherokee people may see the light of self-government, because this document noted that the Cherokee Indians, as a nation, owning the distinct sovereign powers. It stated that the Cherokee people had rights to manage their own territory and the citizens of Georgia had no right to enter without the assent of the Cherokees. The cause of this case was that Worcester claimed that the forced removal of his family was a violation of the constitutional right. The document indicated that the tribes were under the protection of the federal government and the tribal people could not be removed from the land. So this case was in favor of the Indians and they would support it.
Cherokee Chief John Ross began to devise a plan to counter this removal and he stated with the Blood Law which stated that any Cherokee that made a deal to sell land to the United States without the consent of the entire tribe faced dire and certain consequences. Chief Ross then set out to take the Cherokee case all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. In the case of Worcester v Georgia the U.S. Chief Justice, John Marshall ruled The Cherokee Nation is a distinct community, occupying its own territory with boundaries accurately described and which the laws of Georgia can have no force and which the citizens of Georgia have no right to enter but with the consent of the Cherokees themselves. The Cherokees were astatic with this ruling. However,
The case of Cherokee Nation V Georgia was a very important one. For a long time the Cherokee Nation lived in Georgia for hundreds of years. The Cherokee Nation has helped shape our country. When Hernando de Soto came to what is now the United States, he encountered at least three Cherokee Native American tribes. In the year of 1711, the English have given firearms to the Cherokees in exchange for their help in fighting the Tuscarora in the Tuscarora War.
The white people wanted Native land after discovering gold in the mountains. Andrew Jackson declared that the move would be benefitting for all people, as the would be less conflict. The Cherokee believed the land was really theirs, and therefore had a right to continue living there. John Ross, chief of the Cherokee, brought the case to the Supreme court, where it was ruled in the favor of the Cherokee. However, Jackson went against the court’s ruling and decided to move them anyway.
Any day now we will be forced of our ancestral lands that we have inhabited for centuries, all do to a treaty that holds no grounds. Although the treaty may have been signed by who you call the Treaty party, these individuals hold no actually authority for the Cherokee. They were not appointed by any council and had no authority to make a treaty even if they thought that they were doing it for the good of the Cherokee nation. Likewise because the Treaty party had no real authority to sign a treaty and materials agreed upon by the Treaty party, so any agreements made between this party and the government should hold no legal binding. However, despite this fact the treaty was still ratified and now we are going to get forced out of our homes.
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.