Isabella Carter
The Cherokee Nation v. Georgia case of 1831 was a landmark United States Supreme Court case that had a significant impact on how Native American tribes are treated under federal law. The case was brought by the Cherokee Nation, seeking to prevent the state of Georgia from enforcing laws that would displace them from their land and strip them of their rights. The Cherokee Nation argued that these laws violated the treaties they had negotiated with the United States. The Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice John Marshall, agreed to hear the case but ultimately declined to rule on its merits, stating that it lacked the original jurisdiction or authority to decide in a matter between a U.S. state and the Cherokee Nation. The Court's decision, which classified the Cherokee Nation as a domestic dependent nation rather than a foreign nation, set a precedent for the treatment of Native American tribes under federal law and highlighted the growing tensions over tribal sovereignty.
Explore related products
![The Case of the Cherokee Nation against the State of Georgia : Argued and Determined at the Supreme Court of the United States, January Term, 1831 : with an Appendix ... 1831 [Leather Bound]](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/617DLHXyzlL._AC_UY218_.jpg)
What You'll Learn
The Cherokee Nation's status as a foreign nation
The Cherokee Nation is the largest of three federally recognized tribes of Cherokees in the United States. It includes people descended from members of the Old Cherokee Nation who relocated from the Southeast to Indian Territory, as well as Cherokees who were forced to relocate on the Trail of Tears. The tribe also includes descendants of Cherokee Freedmen and Natchez Nation. The Cherokee Nation has a reservation spanning 14 counties in the northeastern corner of Oklahoma.
In 1828, the Cherokee Nation sought an injunction from the Supreme Court to prevent the state of Georgia from enforcing laws that stripped the Cherokee people of their rights and displaced them from their land. The Cherokee Nation argued that these laws violated the treaties they had negotiated with the United States. In the case of Cherokee Nation v. Georgia, the Court ruled that the Cherokees did not constitute a foreign nation within the meaning of Article III of the Constitution. The Court determined that the Cherokee Nation was not a "foreign nation" but a "'domestic dependent nation'", and therefore lacked the standing to sue as a "foreign" nation.
The Cherokee Nation's status as a "domestic dependent nation" set a precedent for how Native American tribes are treated under federal law. This case unfolded against the backdrop of the Indian Removal Act of 1830 and highlighted the growing tensions over tribal sovereignty. The Cherokee Nation's legal battles have had a lasting impact on contemporary interpretations of Native sovereignty.
Despite the ruling in Cherokee Nation v. Georgia, the Cherokee Nation has continued to assert its sovereignty and protect its rights. In the early 20th century, courts interpreted legislation as having dissolved tribal governments, but by the late 1970s, courts shifted their interpretations to finding that tribal governments had never been disestablished. The Cherokee Nation has a written constitution and a sovereign tribal government, with a Principal Chief and a National Council that serves as the legislative branch. The tribe has also established businesses, schools, and a newspaper published in both English and Cherokee. The Cherokee Nation is committed to preserving its culture, language, and values, and improving the quality of life for its citizens.
Whiskey Rebellion: Constitution's Strength and Resolve
You may want to see also
The Supreme Court's jurisdiction
The Cherokee Nation argued that they were a "foreign nation" under the Constitution and that Georgia's laws violated treaties and the U.S. Constitution. They claimed that Georgia was exerting physical force and that the Court should intervene to protect their rights. However, Georgia countered that the Cherokee Nation lacked standing as a foreign nation due to their absence of a constitution and centralised government.
The Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice John Marshall, agreed to hear the case. In his opinion, Marshall concluded that Indian tribes retained some sovereignty but were not foreign nations in the sense required to bring suit in federal court. He emphasised that the Constitution did not envision tribes as fully independent entities, instead characterising them as "domestic dependent nations". This distinction was crucial, as it meant that the Cherokee Nation lacked the legal standing to sue Georgia in federal court as a foreign nation.
Justice William Johnson concurred with Marshall, describing tribes as lacking formal governance and, therefore, the status of sovereign entities. However, Justice Smith Thompson dissented, arguing that the Cherokee Nation was a foreign state based on its ability to self-govern and enter into treaties. He maintained that Georgia's laws violated federal treaties and caused harm to the Cherokee.
Ultimately, the Supreme Court declined to rule on the merits of the case, stating that it lacked original jurisdiction. The Court's decision set a precedent for how Native American tribes are treated under federal law, with Justice Marshall's characterisation of tribes as "domestic dependent nations" shaping their legal status and highlighting the growing tensions over tribal sovereignty.
Best Books for Family Constitutions: Guide to Building a Legacy
You may want to see also
Georgia's enforcement of state laws
In 1828, the Cherokee Nation sought an injunction from the Supreme Court to prevent the state of Georgia from enforcing a series of laws that stripped the Cherokee people of their rights and displaced them from their land. The laws passed by Georgia in 1828 stripped the Cherokee of legal protections within the state to ensure their forced removal. This was against treaties the Cherokees had negotiated with the United States.
The Cherokee Nation, led by Principal Chief John Ross, sought to resist Georgia's state laws. In January 1829, Chief Ross led a delegation to Washington to resolve disputes over the failure of the US government to pay annuities to the Cherokee and to seek federal enforcement of the boundary between the territory of the state of Georgia and the Cherokee Nation's historic tribal lands within that state.
The Cherokee Nation asked the Court to stop Georgia from enforcing state laws that took away their rights within the Cherokee territory. They argued that Georgia's laws violated federal treaties and acts of Congress, causing significant harm to the Cherokee. They also claimed that the state of Georgia was attempting to seize their lands, which had been assured to them by the United States.
Georgia countered by arguing that the Cherokee lacked standing as a foreign nation, citing their absence of a constitution and centralized government. They argued that the Cherokee Nation was not a "foreign nation" but a "domestic dependent nation", and that it was not subject to Georgia's jurisdiction.
The Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice John Marshall, agreed to hear the case but declined to rule on the merits of the case, stating that it lacked the original jurisdiction or authority to decide in a matter between a U.S. state and the Cherokee Nation. The Court determined that the Cherokee Nation was not a "foreign state" in the sense used in the U.S. Constitution and therefore did not have the standing to sue as a "foreign" nation.
Louisiana's Constitution: Congress' 1864 Rejection Explained
You may want to see also
Explore related products
The Cherokee Nation's rights and displacement from their land
In 1828, the Cherokee Nation sought an injunction from the Supreme Court to stop the state of Georgia from enforcing laws that stripped the Cherokee people of their rights and displaced them from their land. The Cherokee Nation argued that these laws violated the treaties they had negotiated with the United States. This case, known as Cherokee Nation v. Georgia, was a significant moment in the struggle for Cherokee rights.
The Cherokee Nation had established a written constitution in 1827, declaring themselves a sovereign and independent nation. They had also developed a bicameral legislature and a permanent police force, demonstrating their capacity for self-governance. However, despite these achievements, the Cherokee people faced increasing pressure from settlers and the federal government to relocate west, as their land was seen as valuable for agriculture and the growing cotton industry.
In the Cherokee Nation v. Georgia case, the Supreme Court ruled that the Cherokee Nation did not constitute a "foreign nation" within the meaning of Article III of the Constitution and, therefore, lacked the standing to sue in federal court. The Court also stated that it lacked the original jurisdiction to decide in a matter between a U.S. state and the Cherokee Nation. This ruling set a precedent for how Native American tribes would be treated under federal law, with the Court comparing the relationship between the Cherokee Nation and the United States to that of a ""ward to its guardian".
Despite the ruling, the Cherokee Nation continued to resist displacement and fought to protect their rights. The discovery of gold on Cherokee lands in 1830 further intensified pressure on the Cherokee people, as Georgians, Carolinians, Virginians, and Alabamians sought to claim these lands for themselves. Georgia held lotteries to distribute Cherokee land and gold rights to whites, further displacing the Cherokee from their territory.
The Indian Removal Act of 1830 gave President Andrew Jackson the authority to negotiate removal treaties with the Cherokee and other Native American nations, and he used the dispute with Georgia to pressure the Cherokee into signing a treaty. The Cherokee Nation was ultimately forced to relocate west of the Mississippi River, in what became known as the Trail of Tears, a forced relocation that resulted in significant hardship and loss for the Cherokee people.
Connecticut's Influence on the Framers of the US Constitution
You may want to see also
The violation of treaties
The Cherokee Nation v. Georgia (1831) was a landmark case in the United States Supreme Court. The case was brought forward by the Cherokee Nation, who sought to prevent the state of Georgia from enforcing laws that infringed upon their rights and sovereignty within their territory. The Cherokee Nation argued that Georgia's state legislation aimed to "annihilate the Cherokees as a political society" and violated the treaties negotiated with the United States, the U.S. Constitution, and federal laws.
The Cherokee Nation, represented by William Wirt, contended that they qualified as a "foreign nation" under the Constitution and had the standing to sue Georgia. Wirt asked the Court to nullify Georgia's laws extending over Cherokee territory. He argued that the Cherokee Nation was a "foreign nation in the sense of our constitution and law" and was not subject to Georgia's jurisdiction.
However, the Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice John Marshall, declined to rule on the merits of the case. The Court determined that the Cherokee Nation was not a "foreign nation" but a "domestic dependent nation," and consequently lacked the standing to sue as a "foreign" nation. Marshall emphasized that the Constitution did not envision tribes as fully independent entities, and their relationship with the United States was like that of a "ward to its guardian."
Despite the Court's ruling, Justice Smith Thompson, joined by Justice Joseph Story, dissented. They argued that the Cherokee Nation was a foreign state based on its ability to self-govern and enter into treaties. Thompson held that Georgia's laws violated federal treaties and acts of Congress, causing significant harm to the Cherokee Nation.
The Cherokee Nation v. Georgia case set a precedent for how Native American tribes would be treated under federal law and highlighted the growing tensions over tribal sovereignty. The case also demonstrated the perceived lack of status of Native American tribes as sovereign entities, with Justice William Johnson describing them as "wandering hordes, held together only by ties of blood and habit, and having neither rules nor government beyond what is required in a savage state."
Where is the Liberty Bell? Constitution Center's Icon
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
The Supreme Court declined to rule on the case's merits, stating that it lacked the original jurisdiction or authority to decide in a matter between a U.S. state and the Cherokee Nation.
The Court ruled that the Cherokee Nation did not constitute a foreign nation within the meaning of Article III of the Constitution, which extended the judicial power of the U.S. to cases between a state and a foreign nation.
This case set a precedent for how Native American tribes are treated under federal law, defining them as "domestic dependent nations" rather than foreign nations. It also highlighted the growing tensions over tribal sovereignty and the Indian Removal Act of 1830.
