Question

In Worcester v. Georgia (1832), why did the Supreme Court rule that Georgia did not have the authority to remove the Cherokees from their land?

Only the federal government had the authority to deal with a sovereign nation.
Only federal law, not state law, applies to American Indian individuals.
It was illegal for Georgia to take this land from an individual.
Cherokee land was considered federal land and did not belong to Georgia.

Answer 1

Only federal law, not state law, applies to American Indian individuals.

Step-by-step explanation:

The state of Georgia in an agreement with the federal government claims a large area of western land in an exchange for the federal government negotiating treaties in the removal of the Indians. The supreme court gave judgment that the Cherokee could keep their piece of land as they are keeping it earlier because of earlier Federal Treaties.

Furthermore, the Supreme court ruled that the agreement was between two Nations could not be overruled by Georgia.

Answer 2

The correct option is: "Only federal law, not state law, applies to American Indian individuals."

When Georgia wanted to extend state laws on Cherokee tribal lands, the matter reached the Supreme Court of the United States. In the Cherokee Nation v. Georgia (1831), the Marshall Court ruled that the Cherokees were not a sovereign and independent nation, and therefore refused to hear the case. However, in Worcester v. State of Georgia (1832), the Court ruled that Georgia could not impose its laws in Cherokee territory, since only the national government - and not the state governments - had authority in Indian affairs.