What was the case of Worcester verses Georgia?

Answer 1

President Jackson pressured the Governor of Georgia to release the eleven jailed missionaries, upholding the only substantive ruling in the case.

Worcester served little useful purpose to the Cherokee. The US Supreme Court ruled that the state of Georgia had no legal right to interfere with the Nation or pass laws enforceable on native land, but had no power to enforce its decisions.

Chief Justice Marshall wrote a strong opinion urging the federal government to protect the Native Americans from Georgia's aggression, but was unable to persuade President Jackson to his point of view. Georgia chose to ignore the Supreme Court's order to stop intruding on the Cherokee's rights, and since Jackson had no legal obligation to abide by Marshall's opinion (because the US government wasn't party to the Worcester v. Georgia case), nothing changed for the better as a result of the case.

Marshall had no real hope of finding support for his position in the federal government, because the President and majority of Congress wanted to convert prime Cherokee property for their own economic use. In 1838, the United States succeeded in acquiring Cherokee land in an illegal trade under the Treaty of New Echota. The end result was the tragic "Trail of Tears" relocation from Georgia to territory west of the Mississippi River, causing hardship and death for many Native Americans.

Case Citation:

Worcester v. Georgia, 31 US 515 (1832)

For more information, see Related Questions, below.

Answer 2

Worcester v. Georgia (1832), was a case in which the United States Supreme Court vacated the conviction of Samuel Worcester, holding that the Georgia criminal statute, prohibiting non-Indians from being present on Indian lands without a license from the state, was unconstitutional.

Answer 3

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)