Worcester v. Georgia - Recap.

So to recap, here are the basic points from Worcester v. Georgia... as taken from my class notes.

Worcester v. GA – this case was about white persons residing within the limits of the Cherokee nation without a "license" and without having taken an oath to support or defend Georgia from hostile indians, as Georgia was ordering all non-indians to do.

• Before this, there was no history of England interfering with internal affairs or the government of indians, farther than to keep out the agents of foreign powers. Britain considered them as nations capable of maintaining relations of peace and war, of governing themselves, under her protection, and she made treaties with them, the obligations of which she acknowledged. This was the settled state when US came in and took over for England.
• The Constitution confers on Congress the powers of war and peace, of making treaties, and of regulating commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, AND WITH THE INDIAN TRIBES. These powers comprehend all that is required for the regulation of our intercourse with the Indians… they’re not limited by any restrictions on their free actions.
• The Acts of GA (making these laws are )repugnant to the Constitution, laws and treaties of the US. They interfere with relations established between the US and the Cherokee, regulation is exclusive to the government of the nation, not to be undertaken by the states.
• The Concurring Supreme Court opinion said that "the exercise of the power of self-gov’t by NDNs is undoubtedly contemplated to be temporary. If it becomes inconsistent with political welfare of the states, weaker power must give." meaning they kind of thought that indians would eventually die off or integrate, but they upheld the power of the nations as long as it was there.
• 2 of the Supreme Court justices, Johnson/Baldwin, interpret the treaty as far as possible to construe sovereignty, as NDNs would see it. But they were not in the majority.
• This case locks in and legally endorses the supreme power of the federal government over indians - not exactly the best thing, but it did get the states off their backs.
• This was the famous case where President Jackson said “Marshall has made his decision, now let him enforce it.”
• McLean’s opinion in this case was read by lower courts as leaving open the possibility of judicial review every so often to determine whether a particular tribe had lost the power of self-government. But it hasn't been really used that way so far.
• Essentially, the Court said - if federal power/protection over tribes are terminated, its for congress, not courts, to say so.
• Modern courts have continued to rely on Worcester, but trend has been away from the idea of inherent NDN sovereignty as a bar to state JUR and toward reliance on federal preemption.
• Court sees the "sovereignty doctrine" today as a backdrop against which the applicable treaties and fed statutes must be read. Worcester is an enduring and most frequently cited case.