Jump to content

Worcester v. Georgia: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 43: Line 43:
In a very well known quotation that is probably apocryphal, President [[Andrew Jackson]] reportedly responded: "John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it!". This derives from Jackson's consideration on the case in a letter to John Coffee, ''"...the decision of the Supreme Court has fell still born, and they find that they cannot coerce Georgia to yield to its mandate,"'' (that is, the Court's opinion because it had no power to enforce its edict).<ref>{{cite book|last=Boller |first=Paul F. |coauthor=John H. George |title=They Never Said It: A Book of False Quotes, Misquotes, & False Attributions |year=1989 |place=New York, NY |publisher=Oxford University Press |url=http://books.google.com/?id=NCOEYJ0q-DUC&printsec=frontcover |page=53 | isbn=978-0-19-506469-8}}</ref>
In a very well known quotation that is probably apocryphal, President [[Andrew Jackson]] reportedly responded: "John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it!". This derives from Jackson's consideration on the case in a letter to John Coffee, ''"...the decision of the Supreme Court has fell still born, and they find that they cannot coerce Georgia to yield to its mandate,"'' (that is, the Court's opinion because it had no power to enforce its edict).<ref>{{cite book|last=Boller |first=Paul F. |coauthor=John H. George |title=They Never Said It: A Book of False Quotes, Misquotes, & False Attributions |year=1989 |place=New York, NY |publisher=Oxford University Press |url=http://books.google.com/?id=NCOEYJ0q-DUC&printsec=frontcover |page=53 | isbn=978-0-19-506469-8}}</ref>


The ruling in ''Worcester'' ordered that Worcester be freed; Georgia complied after several months. In 1833, the newly elected governor, [[Wilson Lumpkin]], offered to pardon Worcester and Butler if they ceased their activities among the Cherokee. The two complied and were freed (under the authority of a January 14, 1833 general proclamation, not a formal pardon);<ref>Chused, 1999.</ref> they never returned to Cherokee lands.
The queir in ''Worcester'' ordered that Worcester be freed; Georgia complied after several months. In 1833, the newly elected governor, [[Wilson Lumpkin]], offered to pardon Worcester and Butler if they ceased their activities among the Cherokee. The two complied and were freed (under the authority of a January 14, 1833 general proclamation, not a formal pardon);<ref>Chused, 1999.</ref> they never returned to Cherokee lands.


The federal government and the Cherokee were not party to the suit. ''Worcester'' imposed no obligations on Jackson; there was nothing for him to enforce.<ref name="b">Banner, 2005, pp. 218—24.</ref><ref>Norgren, 2004, pp. 122—30.</ref> The Court did not ask [[federal marshal]]s to carry out the decision, as had become standard.<ref>Berutti, 1992, pp. 305—06.</ref> ''Worcester'' may be seen as a prudential decision, for avoiding the possibility of political conflict between the Court and the Executive, while still delivering what appeared to be a pro-Indian decision.<ref>Lytle, 1980, p. 69.</ref>
The federal government and the Cherokee were not party to the suit. ''Worcester'' imposed no obligations on Jackson; there was nothing for him to enforce.<ref name="b">Banner, 2005, pp. 218—24.</ref><ref>Norgren, 2004, pp. 122—30.</ref> The Court did not ask [[federal marshal]]s to carry out the decision, as had become standard.<ref>Berutti, 1992, pp. 305—06.</ref> ''Worcester'' may be seen as a prudential decision, for avoiding the possibility of political conflict between the Court and the Executive, while still delivering what appeared to be a pro-Indian decision.<ref>Lytle, 1980, p. 69.</ref>

Revision as of 19:50, 6 January 2014

Worcester v. Georgia
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued February 20, 1831
Decided March 3, 1832
Full case nameSamuel A. Worcester v. Georgia
Citations31 U.S. 515 (more)
8 L. Ed. 483
Case history
PriorPlaintiff convicted in Gwinnett County, Georgia by the Georgia Superior Court (September 15, 1831)
SubsequentNone
Holding
Worcester's conviction is void, because states have no criminal jurisdiction in Indian Country.
Court membership
Chief Justice
John Marshall
Associate Justices
William Johnson · Gabriel Duvall
Joseph Story · Smith Thompson
John McLean · Henry Baldwin
Case opinions
MajorityMarshall, joined by Johnson, Duvall, Story, Thompson
ConcurrenceMcLean
DissentBaldwin
Laws applied
U.S. Const. art. I

Worcester v. Georgia, 31 U.S. (6 Pet.) 515 (1832), was a case in which the United States Supreme Court vacated the conviction of Samuel Worcester and held that the Georgia criminal statute that prohibited non-Native Americans from being present on Native American lands without a license from the state was unconstitutional.

The opinion is most famous for its dicta, which lay out the relationship between tribes and the state and federal governments, building the foundations of the doctrine of tribal sovereignty in the United States.

Background

Facts

Georgia passed 5 laws restricting authority of the Cherokees over their lands. Among these was a law requiring all whites living in Cherokee Indian Territory, including missionaries and persons married to Cherokee, to obtain a state license to live there. After seven missionaries refused to obtain licenses, they were arrested, convicted, and sentenced to four years of hard labor. They refused to obey the military when they were asked to leave the state. They appealed their case to the United States Supreme Court, arguing that the law under which they had been convicted was unconstitutional because states have no authority to pass laws concerning sovereign Indian Nations. The Supreme court sided with the Cherokee and ruled the laws unconstitutional.

The missionaries Samuel Worcester and Elizur Butler were arrested by Georgia because of their opposition to Cherokee removal. Even if they had applied for state licenses, they still would have been denied. The Georgia state courts had previously deferred to Worcester because of his federal appointment as postmaster to New Echota, the Cherokee capital. However, George Rockingham Gilmer, the governor of Georgia, persuaded the federal government to withdraw Worcester's appointment as postmaster in order to make him subject to arrest.

Opinion

Chief Justice John Marshall laid out in this opinion the relationship between the Indian Nations and the United States is that of nations. He argued that the United States, in the character of the federal government, inherited the rights of Great Britain as they were held by that nation. Those rights, he stated, are the sole right of dealing with the Indian nations in North America, to the exclusion of any other European power, and not the rights of possession to their land or political dominion over their laws. He acknowledged that the exercise of conquest and purchase can give political dominion, but those are in the hands of the federal government and not the states.

The court ruled that the individual states, had no authority in American Indian affairs.

Legacy

Samuel Worcester

Jackson's response

In a very well known quotation that is probably apocryphal, President Andrew Jackson reportedly responded: "John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it!". This derives from Jackson's consideration on the case in a letter to John Coffee, "...the decision of the Supreme Court has fell still born, and they find that they cannot coerce Georgia to yield to its mandate," (that is, the Court's opinion because it had no power to enforce its edict).[1]

The queir in Worcester ordered that Worcester be freed; Georgia complied after several months. In 1833, the newly elected governor, Wilson Lumpkin, offered to pardon Worcester and Butler if they ceased their activities among the Cherokee. The two complied and were freed (under the authority of a January 14, 1833 general proclamation, not a formal pardon);[2] they never returned to Cherokee lands.

The federal government and the Cherokee were not party to the suit. Worcester imposed no obligations on Jackson; there was nothing for him to enforce.[3][4] The Court did not ask federal marshals to carry out the decision, as had become standard.[5] Worcester may be seen as a prudential decision, for avoiding the possibility of political conflict between the Court and the Executive, while still delivering what appeared to be a pro-Indian decision.[6]

As a tribal sovereignty precedent

Marshall's language in Worcester may have been motivated by his regret that his earlier opinions in Fletcher and Johnson had been used as a justification for Georgia's actions. Justice Story considered it similarly, writing in a letter to his wife dated March 4, 1832: "Thanks be to God, the Court can wash their hands clean of the iniquity of oppressing the Indians and disregarding their rights."[7] Because Jackson proceeded with Cherokee removal, Worcester did little more for indigenous rights than Johnson v. M'Intosh or Cherokee Nation v. Georgia.[8][9]

Worcester is cited in several later opinions on the subject of tribal sovereignty in the United States.

Notes

  1. ^ Boller, Paul F. (1989). They Never Said It: A Book of False Quotes, Misquotes, & False Attributions. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. p. 53. ISBN 978-0-19-506469-8. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |coauthor= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
  2. ^ Chused, 1999.
  3. ^ Banner, 2005, pp. 218—24.
  4. ^ Norgren, 2004, pp. 122—30.
  5. ^ Berutti, 1992, pp. 305—06.
  6. ^ Lytle, 1980, p. 69.
  7. ^ Warren, 1926, l.757.
  8. ^ Robertson, 2005, p. 117—44.
  9. ^ Banner, 2005, pp. 220–27.

References

  • Stuart Banner, How the Indians Lost Their Land: Law and Power on the Frontier (2005).
  • Berutti, Ronald A. (1992). "The Cherokee Cases: The Fight to Save the Supreme Court and the Cherokee Indians". American Indian Law Review. 17 (1): 291–308. doi:10.2307/20068726. {{cite journal}}: Cite has empty unknown parameters: |month= and |coauthors= (help)
  • Burke, Joseph C. (1969). "The Cherokee Cases: A Study in Law, Politics, and Morality". Stanford Law Review. 21 (3). Stanford Law Review, Vol. 21, No. 3: 500–531. doi:10.2307/1227621. JSTOR 1227621. {{cite journal}}: Cite has empty unknown parameters: |month= and |coauthors= (help)
  • Chused, Richard (1999). Cases, Materials, and Problems in Property (2nd ed.). New York: M. Bender. ISBN 0-8205-4135-4. {{cite book}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
  • Lytle, Cliford M. (1980). "The Supreme Court, Tribal Sovereignty, and Continuing Problems of State Encroachment into Indian Country". American Indian Law Review. 8 (1): 65–77. doi:10.2307/20068139. {{cite journal}}: Cite has empty unknown parameters: |month= and |coauthors= (help)
  • Jill Norgren, The Cherokee Cases: Two Landmark Federal Decisions in the Fight for Sovereignty (2004).
  • Prucha, Francis Paul (1984). The Great Father: The United States Government and the American Indians. Vol. I. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press. ISBN 0-8032-3668-9. {{cite book}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
  • Lindsay G. Robertson, Conquest by Law: How the Discovery of America Dispossessed Indigenous Peoples of Their Lands (2005).
  • Smith, Jean Edward (1996). John Marshall: Definer Of A Nation. New York: Henry Holt & Company. ISBN 0-8050-1389-X. {{cite book}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
  • Charles Warren. The Supreme Court in United States History, (2d. ed., 1926). 2 vols.
Wikisource has original text related to this article:
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Worcester_v._Georgia&oldid=589484869"