How did the Indian removal act of 1830 go against the war Chester versus Georgia ruling
A. It extended a military campaign against Native American peoples who had farmland
B. It notified all previous treaties that protected the interests of Georgians against Cherokees
C. It was a law banning Native American groups from owning land within the borders of any US state
D. It ignore that fact that Indian lands were sovereign and not technically part of the United States
Oops I choose A
What is this?
"war Chester versus Georgia"
Do you mean Worcester vs Georgia?
Yes sorry didn’t check my spelling
Yes, A.
Thank you
You're welcome.
The Indian Removal Act of 1830 went against the ruling in Worcester v. Georgia (not Chester v. Georgia). In the Worcester v. Georgia case, the Supreme Court recognized the sovereignty of Native American tribes and stated that they possessed the right to their ancestral lands. This ruling invalidated Georgia laws that aimed to regulate the land rights of the Cherokee Nation.
To explain how the Indian Removal Act of 1830 violated the Worcester v. Georgia ruling, let's examine the options you provided:
A. It extended a military campaign against Native American peoples who had farmland.
This option is not directly related to the violation of the ruling. While the Indian Removal Act did lead to military campaigns against Native American tribes, it does not explain why it went against the Worcester v. Georgia ruling specifically.
B. It notified all previous treaties that protected the interests of Georgians against Cherokees.
This option does not accurately describe the Indian Removal Act's violation of the ruling. The act did not specifically notify all previous treaties protecting Georgian interests against the Cherokees. Instead, it gave the President the power to negotiate treaties that would exchange Native American lands in the Southeast for lands west of the Mississippi River.
C. It was a law banning Native American groups from owning land within the borders of any US state.
This option accurately explains how the Indian Removal Act violated the ruling in Worcester v. Georgia. The act aimed to remove Native American tribes living in the Southeast, primarily the Cherokee, and relocate them to Indian Territory (present-day Oklahoma). By forcing Native Americans to leave their lands, the act essentially banned them from owning land within the borders of any US state, contradicting the recognition of their sovereignty and land rights established in the Worcester v. Georgia ruling.
D. It ignored the fact that Indian lands were sovereign and not technically part of the United States.
This option accurately explains how the Indian Removal Act violated the ruling. The act disregarded the recognition of Native American land sovereignty laid out in the Worcester v. Georgia case. It treated Native American tribes as if their lands were within the jurisdiction and control of the United States, rather than acknowledging their autonomous status.
Therefore, the correct answer is C. The Indian Removal Act of 1830 violated the Worcester v. Georgia ruling because it was a law banning Native American groups from owning land within the borders of any US state.