In, 1832 the united states supreme court ruled Worcester v. Georgia that the state of Georgia had no right to force the Cherokee from their native lands. Why did this ruling have little positive effect?

Question

Guest

Social Studies

3 April, 03:09

In, 1832 the united states supreme court ruled Worcester v. Georgia that the state of Georgia had no right to force the Cherokee from their native lands. Why did this ruling have little positive effect?

+1

Answers (2)

Know the Answer?

Wheeler · Answer 1

Because Andrew Jackson did not follow through that the state of Georgia followed the act and Georgia forced the Cherokee to leave and they endevored on the trail of tears an 800 mile journey across the country

Gretchen Ponce · Answer 2

Basically, the decision of the supreme court was not respected by other authorities, specially by the president Andrew Jackson, who felt that on the one hand Georgia does not have to respect this ruling and on the other that the supreme court in any case cannot ensure the enforcement of it.

Specifically, the ruling of the court was that only the national government had the power to decide over Indian affairs, and since that power laid in Jackson's hands, he could allow Georgia to proceed with the removal of Cherokee by stating that he (in the name of the national government) will not intervene. Instead, Jackson's actions were further adding to the removal of the Cherokee.