What was the US Supreme Court's rulings in the Cherokee or 'Indian Trilogy' cases?

Answer 1

Johnson v. M'Intosh, 21 US 543 (1823)

The first case, Johnson v. M'Intosh (1823), barred private citizens from purchasing land directly from Native American nations under the theory that the United States government had acquired free title to these territories from the British following the American Revolution, and therefore, the land could only be sold by the federal government.

The issue arose from a land dispute between Johnson and M'Intosh. The Johnson family purchased a plot directly from the Michigan-based Piankeshaw tribe in 1773, while M'Intosh purchased title to the same land from the US government in 1775.

The Court ruled that M'Intosh was the rightful owner, under what came to be known as the "Discovery Doctrine," a rule based on European law that held whoever had "discovered" the land owned it. Under the Discovery Doctrine, the United States was determined to be the "discoverer," thus, the legal owner, while the occupying Piankeshaw were essentially tenants with no right of possession.

The court, in a unanimous decision, acknowledged the practice treated Native Americans "...as an inferior race of people, without the privileges of citizens, and under the perpetual protection and pupillage of the government."

Cherokee Nation v. Georgia, 30 US 1 (1831)

The case of Cherokee Nation v. Georgia, (1831), involved a question of Supreme Court jurisdiction after the state of Georgia enacted a series of laws in 1828 that stripped Native Americans of their rights, in order to annex their land and force the Cherokee to leave the state.

Fearing Georgia had the support of President Jackson, John Ross, Chief of the Cherokee Nation, led a delegation to Washington to plead for relief directly from Congress, bypassing the usual process of negotiating directly with the President. Although Ross found support in Congress, it was insufficient to overturn Georgia law.

Ross then appealed directly to the US Supreme Court for an injunction against Georgia's laws. The Court determined it didn't have original jurisdiction over the matter because the Cherokee Nation was not a state but a "denominated domestic dependent nation." The injunction was denied, but the Court indicated it would be willing to review the matter on appeal from the lower courts.

Worcester v. Georgia, 31 US 515 (1832)

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, they were convicted and sentenced 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. 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.

Popular folklore alleges that President Jackson's response to the 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 had no power to enforce its edict. The federal government, likewise, was unable to intervene unless Georgia defied the Court.

Despite the Court's expressed opinion, the legal ruling in the case applied only to specific Georgia laws and the missionaries' status. With some prompting from President Jackson, Georgia complied with the Court's order to release 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.

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.