11 Matching Annotations
  1. Apr 2023
    1. On several of the matters alleged in the bill, for example on the laws making it criminal to exercise the usual powers of self government in their own country by the Cherokee nation, this court cannot interpose; at least in the form in which those matters are presented.

      This is the courts last hint that they were going to nothing to intercede in the This is important terminology, the word choice that is used here is stating hat the rights of The Cherokee Nations claim to the land could have been a deal that was made, indeed. The challenge that is faced with this deal is that it would be null, with the Cherokee nation being engulfed by the united states, the claim they are apart of the US or in need of resources places them within their domain. government,

    2. The motion for an injunction is denied.

      As expected with terminology the injunction was denied, the federal government wants to keep it's people happy down in the south, so they are unwilling to agitate them and not have the support in later years.

    3. But the court is asked to do more than decide on the title. The bill requires us to control the legislature of Georgia, and to restrain the exertion of its physical force. The propriety of such an interposition by the court may be well questioned. It savours too much of the exercise of political power to be within the proper province of the judicial department. But the opinion on the point respecting parties makes it unnecessary to decide this question.

      This is the court ackowledging there is a problem, but questioning there ability to intercede, as a governing or higharched force.

    4. The counsel have shown conclusively that they are not a state of the union, and have insisted that individually they are aliens, not owing allegiance to the United States. An aggregate of aliens composing a state must, they say, be a foreign state. Each individual being foreign, the whole must be foreign. This argument is imposing, but we must examine it more closely before we yield to it. The condition of the Indians in relation to the United States is perhaps unlike that of any other two people in existence. In the general, nations not owing a common allegiance are foreign to each other. The term foreign nation is, with strict propriety, applicable by either to the other. But the relation of the Indians to the United States is marked by peculiar and cardinal distinctions which exist no where else. [30 U.S. 1, 17] The Indian territory is admitted to compose a part of the United States. In all our maps, geographical treatises, histories, and laws, it is so considered.

      The thought that the Indian territory is apart of the united states, is a viewpoint thing. another viewpoint is the united states took over all of the Indian territory forcing them into endangered status, eventually thinning out their blood and forcing them away again, its all about prospective and here we see what is being painted.

    5. The court has bestowed its best attention on this question, and, after mature deliberation, the majority is of opinion that an Indian tribe or nation within the United States is not a foreign state in the sense of the constitution, and cannot maintain an action in the courts of the United States

      This was The political Deweaponizing of the Cherokee nations largest defense, giving them no stance or ground to defend themselves, using the united states rules and constitution> it was a constant

    6. Be this as it may, the peculiar relations between the United States and the Indians occupying our territory are such, that we should feel much difficulty in considering them as designated by the term foreign state, were there no other part of the constitution which might shed light on the meaning of these words. But we think that in construing them, considerable aid is furnished by that clause in the eighth section of the third article; which empowers congress to ‘regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes.’ In this clause they are as clearly contradistinguished by a name appropriate to themselves, from foreign nations, as from the several states composing the union. They are designated by a distinct appellation; and as this appellation can be applied to neither of the others, neither can the appellation distinguishing either of the others be in fair construction applied to them. The objects, to which the power of regulating commerce might be directed, are divided into three distinct classes-foreign nations, the several states, and Indian tribes.

      This is important information as this is what is going to be used as the body and closing arguments, to strip the Cherokee nation of any help from the Federal government, making it so they have it continue to listen to the laws that Georgia's people set.

    7. Though the Indians are acknowledged to have an unquestionable, and, heretofore, unquestioned right to the lands they occupy, until that right shall be extinguished by a voluntary cession to our government; yet it may well be doubted whether those tribes which reside within the acknowledged boundaries of the United States can, with strict accuracy, be denominated foreign nations. They may, more correctly, perhaps, be denominated domestic dependent nations. They occupy a territory to which we assert a title independent of their will, which must take effect in point of possession when their right of possession ceases. Meanwhile they are in a state of pupilage. Their relation to the United States resembles that of a ward to his guardian.

      This is important terminology, the word choice that is used here is stating hat the rights of The Cherokee Nations claim to the land could have been a deal that was made, indeed. The challenge that is faced with this deal is that it would be null, with the Cherokee nation being engulfed by the united states, the claim they are apart of the US or in need of resources places them within their domain.

  2. Mar 2023
    1. The numerous treaties made with them by the United States recognize them as a people capable of maintaining the relations of peace and war, of being responsible in their political character for any violation of their engagements, or for any aggression committed on the citizens of the United States by any individual of their community. Laws have been enacted in the spirit of these treaties. The acts of our government plainly recognize the Cherokee nation as a state, and the courts are bound by those acts.

      This gives more clause to the fact they are an entity outside of the government, that has made treaties and agreements to let them have peace away from the U.S. Government.

    2. Before we can look into the merits of the case, a preliminary inquiry presents itself. Has this court jurisdiction of the cause?

      It is very important, as this will decide further actions and abilities of the court as well as referendums to correct what they believe is flawed.

    3. This bill is brought by the Cherokee nation, praying an injunction to restrain the state of Georgia from the execution of certain laws of that state, which, as is alleged, go directly to annihilate the Cherokees as a political society, and to seize, for the use of Georgia, the lands of the nation which have been assured to them by the United States in solemn treaties repeatedly made and still in force.

      The Cherokee want to remain on the land that they were promised in previous treaties, which they now consider their own land, which is much more scarce then the land their ancestors lived on. they are asking for relief from the Untited states, who governs over Georgia to enforce promises previously made.