There were many events leading up to the Supreme Court case, Worcester vs. Georgia. A very influential event that contributed to the madness occurred in 1830 when legislation …show more content…
Selflessly, Worcester did not make the case only about himself and his unfair conviction, but the question concerning whether the state of Georgia can constitutionally force their authority over who the Cherokee tribe has relations with, and who the Cherokee allow on their land, as well. At the end of the trial, it was concluded by Chief Justice John Marshall that since Worcester was “within the said territory so recognized as belonging to the said nation and so, as aforesaid, held by them under the guarantee of the United States; that, for those acts, the defendant is not amenable to the laws of Georgia, nor to the jurisdiction of the Courts of the said state”, thus making Worcester’s conviction invalid (“Worcester”). In addition to the justice served to Worcester, it was now made clear, in the highest court system in The United States of America, that the Cherokee people were not under the jurisdiction of any state, and were now recognized as a sovereign nation that is under the protection of The United States.
This was a huge step forward for the Native Americans. America had finally come through on its promise to protect the Natives and treat them as an equal after many years of turmoil and wrongdoings towards the Natives. The feeling of equality was a fresh and newly found feeling for the Native Americans. In the case Worcester vs. Georgia, two nations that …show more content…
Following the trial, the state of Georgia decided to ignore the Supreme Court’s ruling. As a result, Georgia continued to wrongfully control the Cherokee people and enforce unlawful rules upon them. With President Andrew Jackson still in office, nothing was done in response to Georgia’s defiance. Even when the issue was brought to President Jackson by Chief Justice, John Marshall, Jackson showed no interest in helping with the situation. He made it clear that he would not help enforce the ruling, because John Marshall was the one who set the ruling in the first place. Even if the action was unconstitutional, President Jackson would not enforce discipline if he supported the