0
In 1832, the United States Supreme Court ruled in the case of Worcester vs Georgia to vacate the conviction against Samuel Worcester. This verdict ruled that an individual state has no authority in the affairs of American Indians, setting a precedent for tribal sovereignty.
The background of Worcester v. Georgia, (1832) involved a Georgia law requiring whites living on Cherokee Indian territory to obtain a state permit. Seven missionaries were arrested and sentenced to four years hard labor, followed by exile from Georgia for failing to comply. The missionaries stated they didn't seek a state license because they believed their petition would be refused.
The Supreme Court ruled that Georgia had no right to control access to Native American territory; only the United States had governance over Native American Affairs.
Explanation
Worcester v. Georgia was part of what has become known as the "Indian Trilogy," a series of cases involving Native American rights that were reviewed by the Marshall Court during Andrew Jackson's Presidency.
Worcester v. Georgia (1832) addressed a Georgia law requiring whites living in Cherokee territory to obtain a permit from the state. When seven missionaries refused to follow the law, the state of Georgia convicted and sentenced them to four years hard labor. The missionaries believed the state had targeted them because of their support of the Cherokee against Georgia's attempt to drive the Native Americans from the state, a goal established in 1828 when Georgia passed laws stripping the Cherokee of their rights (see Related Links, below, for more information). It was generally understood that had they applied for the permits, they would have been denied.
When the appeal reached the Supreme Court, the Court stated the United States relationship to the Cherokee was that of two separate nations, with the Cherokee classified as a "denominated domestic dependent nation." This gave the federal government the sole right of negotiation with the Native American nations, and barred Georgia from taking action against them. Chief Justice John Marshall further opined that the government did not have the right of possession of Native American land, nor dominion over their laws, short of military conquest or legal purchase.
This ruling contradicted an earlier decision of the Marshall Court in Johnson v. M'Intosh (1823), in which the Justices unanimously decided the United States owned all Native American-occupied land by virtue of the "Discovery Doctrine," a remnant of European law that states land belongs to whomever "discovers" it. The Court's theory was the United States had assumed Britain's title to the land, and the Native Americans' status was that of tenant.
In Johnson, members of the Piankeshaw tribe (part of the Miami Nation) sold a plot of land to the Johnson family in 1773, and the soon-to-be US government sold the same plot to the M'Intosh family in 1775. Johnson, the plaintiff, asserted he had a prior claim to the land, and tried to have M'Intosh evicted. In the Court's opinion, the Piankeshaw sale was invalidated by the "Discovery Doctrine," so they awarded title to the defendant.
Implicit in this practice was the idea, acknowledged by Marshall, that Native Americans were "...an inferior race of people, without the privileges of citizens, and under the perpetual protection and pupilage of the government."
The adverse ruling in Worcester v. Georgia countered the interests of the state and federal governments. Jackson was a staunch proponent of Indian removal because, in his view, the Indian land was a valuable commodity, and their occupation stood in the way of progress. The United States had already appropriated more than 22 million acres of land from the Creek (1814) and Seminole (1818) nations by use of military force. The earlier Johnson ruling validated this practice, while the Worcester ruling seemed to condemn it, supporting, instead, Native American rights.
Popular folklore alleges that President Jackson's response to the Worcester decision was, "John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it!" According to Paul Boller's book, They Never Said It: A Book of False Quotes, Misquotes, & False Attributions, however, what Jackson actually said was, "...the decision of the Supreme Court has fell still born, and they find that they cannot coerce Georgia to yield to its mandate," meaning the Court's opinion was moot because it had no power to enforce its edict (not being a legislative body).
Despite the Court's expressed opinion, the only legal ruling in the case was one that overturned Georgia's conviction of the missionaries. Georgia actually complied with the legal aspect of the Supreme Court ruling, and released the plaintiffs, while ignoring the opinion about the state's lack of rights with regard to both the Cherokee and their territory.
Jackson continued to support Georgia in its mission to drive the Native Americans from their land, and successfully hobbled Marshall by nominating like-minded Associate Justices to vacancies on the then seven-member court. By politicizing the Court, Jackson subverted its power as one of the checks and balances on the Executive and Legislative branches.
The sad conclusion to this story was the 1836 passage of a removal treaty with the Cherokee Nation, the Treaty of New Echota. This resulted in the forcible removal of the Native Americans from their land by the U.S. Army under the Van Buren administration in 1838, a travesty later known as The Trail of Tears.
Case Citation:
Worcester v. Georgia, 31 US 515 (1832)
For more information on Worcester v. Georgia, see Related Questions, below.
Worcester (the missionaries) won by a vote of 6-1.
The US Supreme Court decided the states (in this case, Georgia) had no right to redraw the boundaries of Native American territories, or to require white people to purchase a license to live on the land. As a result, the lower court decision convicting eleven missionaries of violating state law by refusing to purchase a permit to live on Cherokee land was reversed.
The seven-member Supreme Court, lead by Chief Justice John Marshall, voted 6-1 on March 3, 1832, to overturn the missionaries' convictions.
Case Citation:
Worcester v. Georgia, 31 US 515 (1832)
In Worcester v Georgia (1832), the US Supreme Court ruled that "the Georgia criminal statute that prohibited non-Indians from being present on Indian lands without a license from the state was unconstitutional." [Wikipedia.org]
Court ruled that Georgia was not entitled to regulate the Cherokee nor to invade their lands.
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
Who was Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court during Worcester v. Georgia?
John Marshall was Chief Justice and presided over the court in the Worcester v. Georgia ruling, on March 3, 1832.For more information about Worcester v. Georgia, see Related Questions, below.
What year did the US Supreme Court overturn the Georgia laws affecting the Cherokee?
1832The US Supreme Court held Georgia had no right to pass laws regulating use of Cherokee territory or affecting the Cherokee while on their own land in the case Worcester v. Georgia,(1832).Case Citation:Worcester v. Georgia, 31 US 515 (1832)For more information, see Related Questions, below.
Who won Baker v Carr?
Baker won the case.
Who won in the Rhodes v Chapman supreme court case?
chapman won the supreme court case
Who won the case of Gratz v Bollinger?
Gratz
What occurs in the Supreme Court case of Worcester v Georgia?
well.....my dick
Was the case Worcester v Georgia heard under the US Supreme Court's appellate jurisdiction?
Yes, the case was heard under the Supreme Court's appellate jurisdiction. Worcester v. Georgia, (1832) was appealed on a writ of error from the Superior Court for the County of Gwinett in the State of Georgia.Case Citation:Worcester v. Georgia, 31 US 515 (1832)
What did the Supreme Court rule in the case Worcester v. Georgia?
Court ruled that Georgia was not entitled to regulate the Cherokee nor to invade their lands.
In what case did the US Supreme Court argue that Georgia state law had no authority over Native Americans within their own territory?
Worcester v. Georgia, 31 US 515 (1832)For more information on Worcester v. Georgia, see Related Questions, below.
What was the outcome of the Worcester v. Georgia court case?
That the state of Georgia did not have the authority to regulate relations between citizens of its state and members of the Cherokee Nation.Case Citation:Worcester v. Georgia, 31 US 515 (1832)
What was the outcome of the Worcester v Georgia court case?
That the state of Georgia did not have the authority to regulate relations between citizens of its state and members of the Cherokee Nation.Case Citation:Worcester v. Georgia, 31 US 515 (1832)
Worcester v Georgia Impact on US History?
no
What was the outcome of the supreme court case Worcester v. Georgia?
That the state of Georgia did not have the authority to regulate relations between citizens of its state and members of the Cherokee Nation.Case Citation:Worcester v. Georgia, 31 US 515 (1832)
Why was the Supreme Court case Worcester v Georgia a small victory for the Cherokee Nation?
The Cherokees', for the first time got what they wanted.
What was the name of the US Supreme Court case that stated the Cherokee nation was a distinct territory over which only the federal government had authority?
Worcester v. Georgia, 31 US 515 (1832)For more information on Worcester v. Georgia and related cases, see Related Questions, below.
What Amendment was Worcester v Georgia related to?
A person could easily argue Worcester v. Georgia, (1832) invoked both the due process clause and takings clause of the Fifth Amendment.
How was the constitutionality of Georgia law challenged as a result of the 1832 case of Worcester v. Georgia?
In the court case Worcester v. Georgia, the U.S. Supreme Court held in 1832 that the Cherokee Indians constituted a nation holding distinct sovereign powers. Although the decision became the foundation of the principle of tribal sovereignty in the twentieth century, it did not protect the Cherokees from being removed from their ancestral homeland in the Southeast.
