What was the result of the Supreme Court's decision in the Worcester v. Georgia quizlet?

What was the result of the Supreme Court's decision in the Worcester v. Georgia quizlet?

A prominent lawyer who fought several high-profile matters before the United States Supreme Court On appeal, their case was heard by the Supreme Court in Worcester v. Georgia (1832), and the Court ruled that the Cherokee Nation constituted a "distinct political entity" within which Georgia law had no application. As a result, the Georgia statute was unconstitutional. The ruling created a precedent that enabled other Indian nations to claim independence from state authority.

Here are the details of what happened in this case:

Worcester v. Georgia was a case before the Supreme Court of the United States concerning the legal rights of Native Americans. The case arose out of an incident in 1731 in which the colonial government of Georgia outlawed the trade in Indian goods with neighboring tribes. When some Georgians entered the land now known as Cherokee Country illegally to hunt deer, they were captured and taken to court under the accusation of piracy. They were found guilty and sentenced to death, but their sentences were eventually commuted to long periods of servitude.

The defendant in this case was a young man named Worcester who had been charged with murdering two Georgian soldiers. His case came up for trial before a jury in the Superior Court of Richmond County, Georgia. The problem was that Worcester was a native-born citizen of Georgia while the jurors were all foreign-born citizens of another country, Spain. The only way they could serve on the jury would be if they agreed to accept Georgia as their home country for the duration of the trial.

What was the ruling in Worcester v. Georgia, and how did the government respond to it?

Following a review of the case, the Supreme Court concluded in Worcester v. Georgia that Georgia's licensing legislation was unconstitutional because the Cherokee Nation was a different political body that could not be governed by the state, and Worcester's conviction should be reversed. The decision is considered a landmark case for its protection of speech under the First Amendment.

In response to the decision, the State of Georgia passed an act prohibiting the "malicious publication of matter prejudicial to any Indian tribe or nation." This law was held to be unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in 2018, when it was used to prosecute Keggins for her activities with the Invisible Ink Collective.

Worcester had argued that state laws violating the free speech rights of Indians were invalid under treaties between the United States and various Indian tribes. The court rejected this argument, saying that "Cherokee Nation was a separate people with their own government" and therefore could not be bound by the terms of the treaty with the United States.

The court also ruled that the First Amendment protected libelous statements even if they were made about public officials, since there was no evidence that Worcester knew that he was speaking to a member of the Cherokee Nation when he made the comments about the president.

Which historical event is the Supreme Court case, Worcester v. Georgia, most closely associated with?

The Supreme Court declared in Worcester v. Georgia in 1832 that the Cherokee Nation constituted an unique society with rights comparable to those of a foreign country. Chief Justice John Marshall stated that the relations of the state and national governments with the Cherokee had to respect their rights.

These words are considered the first time the Supreme Court applied the term "equal protection of the laws" in its decision. They also marked the beginning of Indian policy under President Andrew Jackson. From then on, until the end of Indian removal in the 1840s, the federal government sought to settle the west by giving land away or selling it. The Cherokee were forced to give up their lands, but some other tribes weren't so lucky. Although Worcester was decided under the Constitution as it existed before the Civil War, its principles have been used ever since by courts to protect minorities from discrimination.

Worcester v. Georgia is also important for being the first time the court applied the principle of judicial review, which says that courts can decide what laws are constitutional by saying that they don't like any law that treats people differently based on their race. Even though this case was about the Cherokee, it could have involved any other minority group that the federal government wanted out of here. This shows that Americans at that time believed that racial discrimination was wrong even if the government did it or not.

About Article Author

Salena Hatch

Salena Hatch is a very experienced and skilled journalist. She has been working in the field for over 10 years and knows all there is to know about journalism. She loves her job because she gets to explore new aspects of the field every day, and learn more about how she can help people by writing about them.

Related posts