enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Johnson v. McIntosh - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johnson_v._McIntosh

    McIntosh, [a] 21 U.S. (8 Wheat.) 543 (1823), also written M‘Intosh, is a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court that held that private citizens could not purchase lands from Native Americans. As the facts were recited by Chief Justice John Marshall , the successor in interest to a private purchase from the Piankeshaw attempted to ...

  3. Discovery doctrine - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discovery_doctrine

    In 1792, U.S. Secretary of State Thomas Jefferson claimed that the doctrine of discovery was international law which was applicable to the new United States government as well. [27] The discovery doctrine was expounded by the United States Supreme Court in a series of decisions, most notably Johnson v. McIntosh in 1823.

  4. William McIntosh (fur trader) - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_McIntosh_(fur_trader)

    Johnson v. McIntosh (1823) is a notable Supreme Court case that held that private citizens could not purchase lands from Native Americans; it affirmed the relationship between the tribes and the United States government. The decision was written by Chief Justice John Marshall, who was a close friend of Thomas S. Hinde. The latter later ...

  5. Aboriginal title in the Marshall Court - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aboriginal_title_in_the...

    Sims' Lessee v. Irvine (1799) was the first Supreme Court decision to discuss aboriginal title (albeit briefly), and the only such decision before the Marshall Court. The Court found ejectment jurisdiction over certain lands, notwithstanding the defendant's claim (in the alternative to the claim that the defendant himself held title) that the lands were still held in aboriginal title because:

  6. In the Courts of the Conqueror - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_the_Courts_of_the_Conqueror

    The case of Johnson v. McIntosh by the Supreme Court in 1823 is well known to most law students as declaring that Indian tribes had the right to occupy the land but only the United States held title to the land by right of discovery. It covers other major cases, including Cherokee Nation v.

  7. Aboriginal title in New Mexico - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aboriginal_title_in_New_Mexico

    In United States v. Sandoval (1913), the Supreme Court recanted nearly all of its analysis from United States v. Joseph (1877). [7] By the time of the Sandoval decision, the Senate estimated, 3,000 non-Indians had purchased Pueblo lands. [8] The prevailing legal view was that the Pueblo could not obtain ejectment against those settlers. [9]

  8. Indian country jurisdiction - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_country_jurisdiction

    Over time, federal statutes and Supreme Court rulings have designated more or less power to tribal governments, depending on federal policy toward Indians. Numerous Supreme Court decisions have created important precedents in Indian country jurisdiction, such as Worcester v. Georgia, Oliphant v. Suquamish Tribe, Montana v.

  9. 1823 in the United States - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1823_in_the_United_States

    McIntosh decided in the Marshall Court, a landmark Supreme Court decision relating to aboriginal title in the United States. August 4 Felipe Enrique Neri, Baron de Bastrop , the Mexican government administrator in charge of Anglo-American immigration into Mexico's state of Coahuila y Tejas , allows Stephen F. Austin to put together an 11-man ...