Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
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 ...
The discovery doctrine, or doctrine of discovery, is a disputed interpretation of international law during the Age of Discovery, introduced into United States municipal law by the US Supreme Court Justice John Marshall in Johnson v. McIntosh (1823).
In the 1978 case of Oliphant v. Suquamish Indian Tribe, the Supreme Court, in a 6–2 opinion authored by Justice William Rehnquist, concluded that tribal courts do not have jurisdiction over non-Indians (the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court at that time, Warren Burger, and Justice Thurgood Marshall filed a dissenting opinion). But the case ...
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 ...
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.
Loyalist property forfeiture, Supreme Court review of state court judgments Laidlaw v. Organ: 15 U.S. 178 (1817) the rule of caveat emptor in a commodity delivery contract: Craig v. Radford: 16 U.S. 594 (1818) Jay Treaty protection of alien enemy defeasible estate; surveying law McCulloch v. Maryland: 17 U.S. 316 (1819) doctrine of implied ...
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. United States, and ...
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]