John Marshall Argumentative Essay

571 Words2 Pages

The rulings made by the John Marshall and the Supreme court regarding the Cherokee and their inhabited land benefited the Cherokee. After decades of losing their land and withstanding the genocide of their people, the younger generations chose to go to court instead of turning to more bloodshed. The Supreme Court came to two conclusions on two different occasions regarding the Cherokee and their lands. The prior ruling stated, in short, that the Cherokee were subject to being protected by the constitution and could not be tried due to their non citizenship. The second ruling further protects the Cherokee from unconstitutional acts conducted by Georgia. These rulings were not only beneficial, but were impartial and withheld constitutionality. President Andrew Jackson made the decision to ignore the supreme court and help Georgia rid itself of Natives. Not even the president is legally permitted to defy the supreme court. Therefore, this action made by Jackson was without a doubt illegal. Not only did …show more content…

This sense of greed would end in the devastation of century old tribes and the death of thousands of Natives. The situation regarding the trail of tears and the removal of Indians from their native territories should have never happened. The Cherokee and all other Native american tribes should have been left alone. Ideally, some form of compromise should have been worked out between the tribes and the United States. The Natives should have never had to move to a designated territory or undergone the trail of tears. Instead, the United States should have negotiated territories so they could still acquire new land while not stealing the natives. The Native tribes had inhabited those lands for centuries and had every right to stay where they wanted. Not only was it unconstitutional, it was also morally wrong and

Show More
Related

  • The Long, Bitter Trail: Andrew Jackson and the Indians by Anthony F.C. Wallace

    847 Words  | 2 Pages

    Throughout Jackson's two terms as President, Jackson used his power unjustly. As a man from the Frontier State of Tennessee and a leader in the Indian wars, Jackson loathed the Native Americans. Keeping with consistency, Jackson found a way to use his power incorrectly to eliminate the Native Americans. In May 1830, President Andrew Jackson signed into law the Indian Removal Act. This act required all tribes east of the Mississippi River to leave their lands and travel to reservations in the Oklahoma Territory on the Great Plains. This was done because of the pressure of white settlers who wanted to take over the lands on which the Indians had lived. The white settlers were already emigrating to the Union, or America. The East Coast was burdened with new settlers and becoming vastly populated. President Andrew Jackson and the government had to find a way to move people to the West to make room. In 1830, a new state law said that the Cherokees would be under the jurisdiction of state rather than federal law. This meant that the Indians now had little, if any, protection against the white settlers that desired their land. However, when the Cherokees brought their case to the Supreme Court, they were told that they could not sue on the basis that they were not a foreign nation. In 1832, though, on appeal, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Cherokees were a "domestic dependent nation," and therefore, eligible to receive federal protection against the state. However, Jackson essentially overruled the decision. By this, Jackson implied that he had more power than anyone else did and he could enforce the bill himself. This is yet another way in which Jackson abused his presidential power in order to produce a favorable result that complied with his own beliefs. The Indian Removal Act forced all Indians tribes be moved west of the Mississippi River. The Choctaw was the first tribe to leave from the southeast.

    Read More

  • DBQ on Jackson and the Indian Removal

    1646 Words  | 4 Pages

    The generalization that, “The decision of the Jackson administration to remove the Cherokee Indians to lands west of the Mississippi River in the 1830s was more a reformulation of the national policy that had been in effect since the 1790s than a change in that policy,” is valid. Ever since the American people arrived at the New World they have continually driven the Native Americans out of their native lands. Many people wanted to contribute to this removal of the Cherokees and their society. Knox proposed a “civilization” of the Indians. President Monroe continued Knox’s plan by developing ways to rid of the Indians, claiming it would be beneficial to all. Andrew Jackson ultimately fulfilled the plan.     First of all, the map [Document A] indicates the relationship between time, land, and policies, which affected the Indians. The Indian Tribes have been forced to give up their land as early as the 1720s. Between the years of 1721 and 1785, the Colonial and Confederation treaties forced the Indians to give up huge portions of their land. During Washington's, Monroe's, and Jefferson's administration, more and more Indian land was being commandeered by the colonists. The Washington administration signed the Treaty of Holston and other supplements between the time periods of 1791 until 1798 that made the Native Americans give up more of their homeland land. The administrations during the 1790's to the 1830's had gradually acquired more and more land from the Cherokee Indians. Jackson followed that precedent by the acquisition of more Cherokee lands.     In later years, those speaking on behalf of the United States government believed that teaching the Indians how to live a more civilized life would only benefit them. Rather than only thinking of benefiting the Indians, we were also trying to benefit ourselves. We were looking to acquire the Indians’ land. In a letter to George Washington, Knox says we should first is to destroy the Indians with an army, and the second is to make peace with them.      The Indian Trade and Intercourse Act of 1793 began to put Knox’s plan into effect. The federal government’s promise of supplying the Indians with animals, agricultural tool...

    Read More

  • Worchester v. Georgia

    1117 Words  | 3 Pages

    The case Worcester v. Georgia (1832) was a basis for the discussion of the issue of states' rights versus the federal government as played out in the administration of President Andrew Jackson and its battle with the Supreme Court. In addition to the constitutional issues involved, the momentum of the westward movement and popular support for Indian resettlement pitted white man against Indian. All of these factors came together in the Worcester case, which alarmed the independence of the Cherokee Nation, but which was not enforced. This examines the legal issues and tragic consequences of Indian resettlement.

    Read More

  • Andrew Jackson Cruel

    341 Words  | 1 Pages

    Andrew Jackson signed the indian removal act in 1830. This act allowed him to make treaties with the natives and steal their lands. The Trail of Tears was a forced relocation of more than 15,000 cherokee Indians. The white men/people gave the natives 2 options: 1. Leave or 2. Stay and Assimilate (learn our culture). The natives couldn’t have their own government. There were 5 civilized tribes including the cherokees. They learned english and went to american schools and when the cherokees went to court they won.

    Read More

  • Reckless Disregard For The Crimes Of Andrew Jackson

    872 Words  | 2 Pages

    Showing that he makes personal decisions instead of political ones. He violated the McCulloh v. Maryland, showing that he did not follow interpretation of the law, ruled by Supreme Court. Jackson violated separation of powers through the destruction of the national bank. Although Jackson believed he would help the poor by terminating the national bank; he did violate the separation of powers. As stated in the McCulloh v. Maryland “the necessary and proper clause gave Congress the right to charter the bank and that if the states could tax the bank, they could also destroy it.” Jackson ultimately disregarded this court decision made by the Supreme Court that the national bank was constitutional. He also defies the Supreme Court by enforcing the Indian Removal Act seeing as he did not hold up their treaty with the Native Americans, denying the interpretation of the treaty. Jackson had no valid reason to kick the Native Americans out of the land they owned first. He forced them to move because of the color of their skin. He did not recognize the Native Americans as citizens and only wanted them out of it because he believed that the land belonged to the white people. He saw himself in a position that higher authority than Supreme Court, showing that he thought he was the president he could do as

    Read More

  • Jacksonian Democracy: Stereotypes, Racism, And Native Americans

    668 Words  | 2 Pages

    John Marshall ruled that Georgia’s seizure of Indian lands was unconstitutional in 1832, and the federal government had treaty obligations to protect the Indians, though Jackson refused to act on the ruling. Jackson urged Congress to pass the Indian Removal Act of 1830. This law was to negotiate a peaceful exchange of Indian lands in the south for new lands in the “Indian Territory,” which is now Oklahoma. The Choctaws and Chickasaws agreed to accept lands in the West, but many other groups resisted relocation, and this resisting caused violent conflicts. The United States military removed the Creeks from their lands, and the Seminoles fought the Second Seminole War, which ended with U.S. troops forcing most of them away from Florida. After this, troops forced more than 15,000 Cherokees to travel from the Southeast to Oklahoma. Many died of disease, exposure and hunger. “The name of the route they followed is known as the “trail of Tears,” which comes from the Cherokee nunna-da-ul-tsun-yi, for the “trail where they cried” (history

    Read More

  • The Effect of Removal Policy on the Native Americans

    1241 Words  | 3 Pages

    The Cherokee Trail of Tears resulted from the execution of the Treaty of New Echota (1835), an “agreement” signed under the Indian Removal Act of 1830 (The Cherokee and the Trail of Tears). With the expansion of the American population, the discovery of gold in Georgia, and the need for even more land for American results in the push to move the Natives who were “in the way”. So with the Indian Removal Act of 1830, Congress acted to remove Natives on the east coast of the United States to land west of the Mississippi River, something in which was never embraced or approved by them (The Cherokee and the Trail of Tears). Many state governments, such as Georgia, did not want Native-owned land within their boundaries, while the Natives did not want to move. However, under the Removal Act, the United States Congress gave then-President Andrew Jackson the authority to negotiate removal treaties.

    Read More

  • Andrew Jackson

    713 Words  | 2 Pages

    To take these lands, American settlers physically invaded the lands to claim as their own, however, they also petitioned the Federal Government to remove the Indians from their native lands. By doing this, they gained the support of the government’s resources and influence, especially President Jackson’s. Using both political and military attacks, the settlers quickly gained the upper hand over the Indians. One example of how President Jackson shirked his responsibilities to the Indian people was by ignoring the Supreme Court’s decision and defying it. There were two Supreme Court cases where the Indians appealed to the court against white settlers.

    Read More

  • Land, Growth, and Justice: The Removal of the Cherokees

    1288 Words  | 3 Pages

    There has always been a big debate on whether the Cherokee Indians should have or should not have been removed from the land they resided on. Although the common consensus of the whites was for removal, and for the Cherokees it was against removal, there were some individuals on each side that disagreed with their groups’ decision. The Cherokee Indians should have been removed from their homeland because the Cherokees would not have been able to survive on their own with the way they were living, they would not have been able to exist amidst a white population, and if they were removed, the whites would have helped them create a new and prosperous civilization.

    Read More

  • The Removal of the Cherokee

    5744 Words  | 12 Pages

    The tragedy of the Cherokee nation has haunted the legacy of Andrew Jackson"'"s Presidency. The events that transpired after the implementation of his Indian policy are indeed heinous and continually pose questions of morality for all generations. Ancient Native American tribes were forced from their ancestral homes in an effort to increase the aggressive expansion of white settlers during the early years of the United States. The most notable removal came after the Indian Removal Act of 1830. The Cherokee, whose journey was known as the '"'Trail of Tears'"', and the four other civilized tribes, Chickasaw, Choctaw, Creek and Seminole, were forced to emigrate to lands west of the Mississippi River, to what is now day Oklahoma, against their will. During the journey westward, over 60,000 Indians were forced from their homelands. Approximately 4000 Cherokee Indians perished during the journey due to famine, disease, and negligence. The Cherokees to traveled a vast distance under force during the arduous winter of 1838-1839.# This is one of the saddest events in American history, yet we must not forget this tragedy.

    Read More

  • Cherokee Pros And Cons

    235 Words  | 1 Pages

    In 1830 Georgia passed a series of laws that denied Cherokee their rights, with the intention of driving the Cherokee from their tribal lands.

    Read More

  • Andrew Jackson: America's Most Popular President

    705 Words  | 2 Pages

    Andrew Jackson never considered Native Americans as citizens, even when they indicated their rights. In Jackson’s message to Congress, he was misleading in saying that the Native Americans were leaving because of “persuasion” and that the “ . . . emigration should be voluntary”(Document 8). The Native Americans were forcibly moved from their homelands and traveled great distances to reach their new shared territory in Oklahoma. Jackson continued the removal of Natives favoring with the white people’s cry for more land to plant cotton. Jackson benefited by removing the Indians to please the common farmers making him more popular and well liked. Cherokee’s wished to stay on their homelands with “a perfect and original right to remain . . .” (Document 9). Native Americans wanted rights like white men, even some of them grew accustomed to Americans ways of civilization such as farming and owning slaves. Moving to the west would be an unknown territory to them that supplies little necessities like food and water. Each tribe did not want to decrease their population due to the lack of food and water, or even lose their sacred cultures and languages. Native Americans wished to stay...

    Read More

  • Indian Betrayal

    1221 Words  | 3 Pages

    Looking back at the history of the United States, there are many instances and issues concerning race and ethnicity that shape the social classes that make up the United States today. There are many stories concerning the American Indian that are filled with betrayal, but there is probably none more cruel and shameful as the removal of the Cherokee Indians in 1838. Blood thirsty for money and property, the white settlers would soon use dirty methods to drive the Cherokee out of their home- lands. The United States government played a critical role in the removal of the Cherokee. “Soon the state governments insisted on the removal of the native peoples, who were already out numbered by the white settlers and considered to be uncivilized “heathens,” not worthy of the land they held” (Sherman 126). This was the attitude of the white settlers. Because of the color of their skin, they spoke a different language, and they were not accustomed to the white mans’ way of life, the Cherokee people suffered many great afflictions even unto death.

    Read More

  • The Indian Removal Act

    589 Words  | 2 Pages

    Twenty-five million acres of land east of the Mississippi that had been occupied by Indians became available due to the Indian Removal Act. The State of Georgia had a particularly contentious relationship with the Cherokee Indians occupying land within their state. The State of Georgia pushed the Federal government to remove the Cherokee Indians from their state because they wanted the land due to the recent discovery of gold and the desire to expand co...

    Read More

  • Understanding the Origins and Culture of Native Americans

    2107 Words  | 5 Pages

    The Trail of Tears happened between 1831-1939 in the states Virginia, West Virginia, North and South Carolina, Kentucky, Tennessee, Georgia, Alabama, and Florida (Vann). A variety of Native Americans were a part of this terrible episode in Native American history and the Cherokees were one of them. In the Trail of Tears event, many Cherokee families that consisted of men, women and children died from being exposed to traumatic events such as starvation and fevers. The federal government had ordered the Native American tribes out of their lands and into other lands (Vann). They were removed from their lands by horrible politicians and military officials. As a result, many Cherokee Indians and their families lost their lives and didn’t make it all the way to their destinations. The reason why the government ordered many of the Native American groups out of the lands they had already owned was because the settlers argued for more land and the Cherokee Indians didn’t want to give up the land they had occupied and made their whole life (Vann). This whole event called the Trail of Tears demonstrated

    Read More

More about John Marshall Argumentative Essay

Open Document