How can you defend Andrew Jackson's "Indian Removal Act" from a legal/constitutional standpoint? ?

What were the government's loopholes?

Thank you!!!

5 Answers

Relevance
  • mcq316
    Lv 7
    1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    I suppose you could argue the Constitution only protects American citizens, and they weren't citizens.

  • In 1831 the Cherokee brought suit against Georgia (Cherokee Nation v Georgia) for removal policies of the state legislature. The supreme court decided that Indian nations were dependent nations and not citizens or foreign nation, therefore the Cherokee lawsuit could not be heard by the court preventing the removal act from being challenged.

  • 1 decade ago

    You can't and it goes against Lockean ideology that all men are equal before the law and have the right to private property. Despite how much I appreciate Jackson for sticking up for the common (white) man along with battling the Central Bankers, he was wrong and this is a dark period in America history.

    Please don't defend it.

  • DAR
    Lv 7
    1 decade ago

    Hard since the Supreme Court ruled against it and he just said 'Let's see John Marshall enforce his order' or words to that effect.

    I guess he was saying 'he' was a coequal branch, but that is a scary thought.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 1 decade ago

    There is none -- just an early case of eminent domain run amok

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.