Overview
This lecture covers the shift to Indian removal policy in the early 1830s, focusing on conflict between Georgia and the Cherokee Nation, the Indian Removal Act of 1830, and the Supreme Court cases Cherokee Nation v. Georgia and Worcester v. Georgia.
Background: Georgia and Cherokee Nation Relations
- Georgia ceded western land claims in 1802 to the U.S. in exchange for the federal government promising to negotiate tribal removal.
- The Muskogee Creek ceded their lands, but the Cherokee largely refused to leave Georgia.
- Cherokees adopted economic and political systems similar to neighboring states, including slavery and a written constitution in 1827.
- The Cherokee became highly literate after Sequoia developed a syllabary (one symbol per syllable).
- Gold was discovered in Cherokee territory in 1829, increasing pressure for removal.
Legal and Political Developments
- Georgia attempted to assert authority over Cherokee lands by attaching them to Georgia counties and invalidating Cherokee laws.
- Georgia based its authority on the Supreme Court case Johnson v. M'Intosh, claiming landlord status over Cherokee land.
- Andrew Jackson, elected in 1828, supported Indian removal and urged Congress to pass the Indian Removal Act, signed in 1830.
- The Indian Removal Act offered tribes the choice to stay under state law or relocate west.
Legislative and Judicial Conflict
- Some in Congress, like Senator Frelinghuysen, argued that Georgia could not impose its laws due to treaties like the Treaty of Hopewell.
- The Cherokee Nation sought judicial protection, hiring William Wirt to challenge Georgia’s laws.
- Wirt argued the Supreme Court had original jurisdiction because the Cherokee Nation was a "foreign state" under Article 3 of the Constitution.
Cherokee Nation v. Georgia (1831)
- The Supreme Court divided opinions on whether the Cherokee Nation was a "foreign state."
- Two justices denied Cherokee Nation as a foreign or domestic state; two considered them both; Chief Justice Marshall found them a "state" but not a "foreign state."
- Marshall introduced the term "domestic dependent nations" and compared tribe-U.S. relations to a "ward to his guardian."
- The Court concluded it lacked jurisdiction but left open the possibility for future legal action.
Key Terms & Definitions
- Indian Removal Act (1830) — Law authorizing relocation of southeastern tribes west of the Mississippi River.
- Syllabary — Written system with one symbol per syllable, used by the Cherokee.
- Original Jurisdiction — Supreme Court’s authority to hear cases first, not on appeal.
- Domestic Dependent Nation — Marshall's term for Indian tribes: sovereign, but reliant on the U.S. government.
Action Items / Next Steps
- Prepare for next lecture on Worcester v. Georgia.
- Review the outcomes and reasoning in Cherokee Nation v. Georgia.
- Understand the meaning and implications of "domestic dependent nations."