The Cherokee Cases: Two Landmark Federal Decisions in the Fight for Sovereignty

by Jill Norgren, Kermit L. Hall (Foreword), Melvin I. Urofsky (Foreword)

This compact history is the first to explore two landmark U.S. Supreme Court cases of the early 1830 Cherokee Nation v. Georgia and Worcester v. Georgia . Legal historian Jill Norgren details the extraordinary story behind these cases, describing how John Ross and other leaders of the Cherokee Nation, having internalized the principles of American law, tested their sovereignty rights before Chief Justice John Marshall in the highest court of the land. The Cherokees’ goal was to solidify these rights and to challenge the aggressive actions that the government and people of Georgia carried out against them under the aegis of law. Written in a style accessible both to students and to general readers, The Cherokee Cases is an ideal guide to understanding the political development of the Cherokee Nation in the early nineteenth century and the tragic outcome of these cases so critical to the establishment of U.S. federal Indian law.  

Genres: History, Research, Native American, Nonfiction

224 pages, Paperback

First published August 14, 1995

Reviews

[Brynn Nelsen · Rating 5 out of 5]

my favorite book we have read for class so far i love connecting legal history to social history and how different branches of government are often competing for different goals. super interesting

[leo uwu · Rating 4 out of 5]

An essential overview of the sociopolitical and historical circumstances surrounding the Cherokee cases, providing an important context for the foundations of Indian law. Any student confused about the early doctrine should consider giving it a read.

[David Nichols · Rating 4 out of 5]

Part of a series on landmark Supreme Court cases, this short monograph provides a readable account of the origins and consequences of the three suits filed by the Cherokees against Georgia in the early 1830s: State vs. Tassels (1830), Cherokee Nation vs. Georgia (1831), and Worcester vs. Georgia (1832). According to Norgren, the three cases grew out of a "diplomatic" dispute between two states claiming sovereignty over the same region, namely the Cherokee nation and Georgia. Both rested their claim on agreements with the federal government, the Georgians on their 1802 territorial "compact" with the United States, the Cherokees on the treaties they had signed with five successive presidential administrations. The Cherokees' leaders, notably Principal Chief John Ross, demonstrated considerable agency in these suits, hiring former attorney general William Wirt to represent them in the Supreme Court after Andrew Jackson's partisans took over the other two branches of the U.S. government. The actual result of the three cases proved ambiguous. While the Worcester decision affirmed some degree of residual Indian sovereignty and partially repealed the conquest-and-discovery language of the Johnson vs. McIntosh case (1823), both the Court and the Jackson administration agreed to set the decision aside in order to defuse confrontations between the United States, South Carolina (over Nullification), and Georgia that might have led to a shooting war. Later courts set aside Native sovereignty in favor of the doctrine of Congressional supremacy asserted in the Major Crimes Act (1885) and the Lone Wolf vs. Hitchcock case (1903). In the 1970s and '80s the Burger and Rehnquist courts did revive the old Cherokee Nation decision, but they mainly used it to emphasize Indians' status as "domestic dependents," not their status as nations. For the most part, Norgren concludes, federal courts since the 1830s have offered Native Americans little more than false hopes.

[Jeni Enjaian · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book is fascinating and well worth a read. I picked it up during preliminary research for a project for one of my grad classes. After completing a case brief on Fletcher v. Peck and noticing the subtle diminution of property rights for indigenous people the topic wouldn't leave my mind. I had to know more about it. Thus I am completing a paper on what could be argued to be the most important of the Cherokee cases, Worcester v. Georgia.

Ms. Norgren does an excellent job in a short space to not only give a broad and specific history of the events leading to the case but also an easy to understand summary of the case as well as the ramifications of its non-implementation. Her prose is simple yet not so simple as to dumb down the topic. She more than adequately summarizes the complex issues (legal, constitutional and moral) that comprise these cases.

I strongly recommend this book to any lover of history, especially a lover of American history.

[AskHistorians]

This book isn't too difficult, and it adds in a great deal about President Jackson, which is always a crowd pleaser. Although, this might sadden a great deal of Jackson lovers. This book details the politics behind Worcester v Georgia and Cherokee Nation v Georgia, which are the cornerstones of Native American Law.

[Gregory Miller · Rating 4 out of 5]

Interesting context added behind the Marshall Cherokee V. Georgia decision. Norgren ascertains the political uncertainty of the Supreme Court during the Jacksonian era and Andrew Jacksons sympathy to the states desire of Indigenous removal. These external factors are obviously not present in the Court summaries and add to the discourse of this historic case.

[Au · Rating 4 out of 5]

Great book. Norgren provided a lot of relevant and interesting context that went above and beyond describing the two cases. The result: heartbreakingly sad.

[Sydney Robertson · Rating 4 out of 5]

Norgren handles the historic Cherokee cases brilliantly. I found that her argument was incredibly well-rounded because the topic was so narrow, so she was able to add more details and analysis in this still relatively short read. Her criticism and analysis is not arrogant or one-sided, but helpful in building your own opinions.

[Sam Gordon · Rating 5 out of 5]

A must-read for people interested in Cherokee history, U.S. history, or the relationship between tribes and the federal government. Tells the heartbreaking story of settler colonialism and Indian removal, a story all U.S. citizens should know but sadly many don't.