John Marshall (1755-1835), Chief Justice of the United
States
John Marshall was the longest serving Chief Justice in Supreme Court history
and played a significant role in the development of the American legal system
and federal Indian law. He established that the courts have the power of
‘judicial review’ which is the authority to strike down laws that violate the
U.S. Constitution. Marshall has been credited with cementing the position of
the American judiciary as an independent and influential branch of government.
The Marshall Court made several important decisions relating to federalism,
shaping the balance of power between the federal government and the states.
Among these decisions are the three cases that form the basic framework of
federal Indian law in the United States, referred to as the ‘Marshall Trilogy.’
I. Johnson v. M’Intosh (1823)
This case primarily related to land issues and the interpretation of the
Doctrine of Discovery in the United States. The case involved a man named
Thomas Johnson who bought land from the Piankeshaw Indians and William M’Intosh
who later obtained a patent to the same land from the United States federal
government. The Court was asked to settle the dispute between the two men and
sided with M’Intosh. The Court went on to say that the Indians did not own land
outright, but that they had rights to occupy lands and only the discovering
nation (U.S.) could settle those land rights. Indians could not sell lands to
individuals and states do not have legal standing to settle aboriginal land
claims. There was a case similar to this much later in Alaska called United
States v. Berrigan (1905). That case involved gold seekers trying to
purchase land from Athabascan people who were living in what is now Delta
Junction. Judge Wickersham ruled that only the federal government could
negotiate with Indians over land rights.
II. Cherokee Nation v. Georgia (1831)
In this case, Cherokee Chief John Ross tried to protect Cherokee lands, fight
off removal, and to keep the laws of Georgia from being imposed on them by
asking for an injunction in the United States Supreme Court. The Cherokees
argued that they were a foreign nation and the laws of Georgia did not apply to
them. The Court denied the injunction and went on to say that the Cherokees were
not a foreign nation, but they were a ‘domestic dependent nation.’ The
relationship between the tribes and the United States was like that of a ‘ward
to a guardian.’ This case outlined the sovereign nature of tribes as not
like states, but not as complete foreign nations either. Tribal sovereignty
(authority to govern) was limited by being within the boundaries of the United
States, but it was inherent sovereignty, which meant that it predated the
United States. The responsibility that the federal government has to
tribes takes root from this and the next of the famous Marshall Indian cases.
That responsibility is called the ‘doctrine of federal trust responsibility.’
The idea was that in exchange for the taking of land from the tribes, the
federal government would protect the tribes in the lands that they ended up
with, and compensate them by providing basic necessities such as food, shelter,
and basic services to the tribes.
III. Worcester v. Georgia (1832)
The last case of the Marshall trilogy involved a missionary, Samuel Worcester
who was preaching on the Cherokee lands, which was prohibited by the laws of
Georgia without a state license to do so. Worcester was imprisoned and filed
suit against the State of Georgia claiming that the State did not have
authority to control activity on Cherokee lands. The Court sided with Worcester
finding that the Cherokee Nation is a distinct community, occupying its own
territory, and within which the laws of Georgia could have no force. This
decision again established that the federal government, not the states have
authority over Indian affairs and that the tribes had inherent sovereignty, the
authority to make and enforce their own laws within their lands.
In summary, the cases set out the following principles of federal Indian
law:
- Aboriginal
land claims: Aboriginal people had land use
rights of occupancy and only the United States government can settle those
claims.
- Tribal
Sovereignty: Tribes are similar to sovereign
nations with the authority to govern themselves. The source of their
authority to govern is ‘inherent,’ meaning that it comes from tribes being
self-governing long before explorers and settlers came to the New World.
- Federal
Trust Responsibility: The Federal
Government has a responsibility to protect Indian lands and resources, and
to provide essential services to Indian people. This comes from the fact
that the federal government took away the vast majority of Indian lands,
and in return promised to provide these things.
Attachment for APUSH
& APGovt - Three Cherokee Cases Questions
Summarize each of the Court Cases in the legal
analysis format below
Title
of the Case (Year)_____________________________
Issue:
Basic
Facts:
Decision:
Why
This Case Is Important:
Title of the Case (Year) _____________________________
Issue:
Basic
Facts:
Decision:
Why
This Case Is Important:
Title of the Case (Year) _____________________________
Issue:
Basic
Facts:
Decision:
Why
This Case Is Important: