The story of the legal battle between the Cherokee Nation and the State of Georgia that ultimately led to the infamous Trail of Tears and the ongoing struggles for Native sovereignty. Sovereignty on Trial tells the story of a trio of landmark United States Supreme Court cases-Johnson v. M'Intosh (1823), Cherokee Nation v. Georgia (1831), and Worcester v. Georgia (1832)-that considered the legal status of Native nations in the early nineteenth century. Known as the Marshall Trilogy-majority opinions all written by Chief Justice John Marshall-the decisions are inconsistent in their holdings and reasoning, leaving American Indian law and interpretations of Native sovereignty confusing and ambiguous. In M'Intosh, Marshall used the imperial doctrine of discovery to diminish the property rights and autonomy of the Native nations. Subsequent interpretations of Marshall's opinion in Cherokee Nation, with its "guardian and ward" analogy, ultimately placed Native people in a dependent status with the United States. At the end of his judicial career, however, Marshall came to view Native rights in a different light, and his opinion in Worcester was a powerful acclamation of Native political sovereignty and territorial rights. Courts have tried with little success to find a coherent line through the three rulings. The two Georgia cases resulted from the state's efforts to extend its jurisdiction over the Cherokee Nation and annihilate its government. These cases were decided against the backdrop of the Indian Removal Act of 1830. When President Andrew Jackson and Congress failed to enforce Worcester, Georgia interned and forcibly removed the Cherokee in the now infamous tragedy known as the Trail of Tears. Tim Alan Garrison places this trio of cases in their broader legal and historical context. Significantly, Garrison explains why Georgia sought to expel the Cherokees from their homeland, how these attacks on native sovereignty tore apart Cherokee national unity, and how the changes in Cherokee political culture determined their strategy in resisting the state's onslaught. The Cherokee resistance against Georgia was a remarkable example of national courage for the Indigenous peoples of the world, and their determination to fight oppression through the judicial system of the United States left a lasting impact on American Indian law. The Cherokee Cases tells an important, if disturbing, story whose reverberations are felt to the present day.
Tim Alan Garrison is Professor Emeritus of History at Portland State University. He is the author of The Legal Ideology of Removal: The Southern Judiciary and the Sovereignty of Native American Nations, and editor of The Encyclopedia of United States Indian Policy and Law; "Our Cause Will Ultimately Triumph": Profiles in American Indian Sovereignty; and The Native South: New Histories and Enduring Legacies.
Series Foreword Introduction 1. Georgia 2. The Cherokee Nation p>3. Crisis 4. Discovery 5. Marshall 6. Georgia v. Tassels 7. Cherokee Nation v. Georgia 8. Worcester v. Georgia 9 Expulsion 10. Impact 11. Judgment 12. The Future Acknowledgments Cases Cited Bibliographic Essay Index
"Sovereignty on Trial provides a deep, yet accessible, analysis of the Supreme Court's so-called Marshall Trilogy of cases, which established the very shaky foundation upon which Indigenous property and political rights have been based for two centuries. Garrison offers a straightforward discussion and analysis of the importance of each opinion within historical contexts, along with competing views of legal scholars, historians, and philosophers. This is not the usual run-of-the mill, dry legal analysis. He is to be commended for a unique and worthy contribution that broadens the conversation and audience on this long-studied subject."-David E. Wilkins, coeditor of Native Voices: American Indian Identity and Resistance "Sovereignty on Trial offers a masterful account of the Cherokee Nation's struggle against the land grab and removal during the early republic. Tim Garrison revisits the Marshall cases and how their legal ambiguity simultaneously advanced and undermined Indigenous sovereignty. More than a study of the past, this book shows how the same legal contradictions define Native Americans' present struggles against an ongoing settler colonial encroachment."-Matthias Voigt, author of Reinventing the Warrior: Masculinity in the American Indian Movement, 1968-1973 "In Sovereignty on Trial, Tim Alan Garrison beautifully weaves together storytelling with legal theory and history with critical analysis. This allowed him to write a book that is deep, comprehensive, and nuanced but also accessible. Providing historical, political, and legal contexts to understand the Marshall Trilogy and other US Supreme Court cases involving the Cherokee Nation, this book also looks to the future and alongside Indigenous scholars and leaders, imagines the restoration of Indigenous sovereignty, with or without the help of federal courts."-Dana Lloyd, author of Land Is Kin: Sovereignty, Religious Freedom, and Indigenous Sacred Sites "Not since Jill Norgren's The Cherokee Cases has a scholar so effectively narrated the stories of the Marshall decisions in such sophisticated and accessible fashion. That Garrison covers not just Cherokee Nation and Worcester but the entire Trilogy and sets his exploration of them within the larger context of US constitutional law makes this remarkable achievement that much more impressive. Insightful, engaging, and attuned to the agency of Native and non-Native actors, this book offers a clear-eyed analysis of the past, present, and future of tribal sovereignty."-Daniel M. Cobb, Ph.D., author of Say We Are Nations: Documents of Politics and Protest in Indigenous America since 1887
