Final answer:
There was no specific Wyoming Supreme Court decision on the seizure of Custer. Custer's actions are intertwined with violations of Native American treaties and land encroachments. The Supreme Court has dealt with Native American sovereignty in different contexts, with rulings that varied in enforcement and impact.
Step-by-step explanation:
The question refers to whether the seizure of Custer was justified and unfortunately, it does not specify a particular court decision by the Wyoming Supreme Court regarding Custer. Custer is commonly associated with the Battle of Little Bighorn, in which General George Armstrong Custer and his forces were defeated by Native Americans. There was no Wyoming Supreme Court decision directly related to this event. However, it is important to note that the context surrounding Custer's actions often involve discussions about the legitimacy of U.S. claims to Native American lands, and how treaties were ignored or violated for expedience by settlers and government alike, particularly with the discovery of gold in the Black Hills and federal government coercion of the Lakota Sioux.
Comparatively, in legal cases such as Cherokee Nation v. Georgia and Worcester v. Georgia, the U.S. Supreme Court did rule on issues concerning Native American sovereignty and the enforcement of state laws on Native American lands, with varying outcomes that significantly impacted Native American nations. Regarding the forced relocations of Native American tribes, such episodes as the Trail of Tears resulted from the lack of enforcement of Supreme Court rulings and the political will aligned with majority population interests.