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 ...
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.
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.
In the 1823 case of Johnson v. McIntosh, the United States Supreme Court handed down a decision stating that Indians could occupy and control lands within the United States but could not hold title to those lands. [22] Jackson viewed the union as a federation of highly esteemed states, as was common before the American Civil War. He opposed ...
The Supreme Court issued three more opinions on Friday, marking the first time the justices have weighed in on the attack on the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.
For premium support please call: 800-290-4726 more ways to reach us
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.