I've found over 94 treaties that the Native Americans signed with the government from 1800-1824, as well as several supreme court rulings and ambiguous state and federal laws that could be used to justify the "Removal Act." For the most part, it simply seems like the government wanted the land and found loophole after loophole to get what it wanted. It's easy to sympathize with the Native Americans but much harder to understand how the government found ways to "legalize" this wholesale removal thing.
2007-03-08 03:56:19 · 5 answers · asked by Katie B 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
You should read "Like A Loaded Weapon" it explains how Supreme court rulings came to be in regards to Native people. They relied a lot on racist rhetoric.
Think about that.. Supreme court cases up until today are being ruled on using obviously racist beliefs.
It is not possible to defend the "Indian Removal Act" from any standpoint. Look at who made the laws, who enforced the laws, and why the laws were created. This is the time when everything was being created. It wasn't a law that was created upon some greater moral standing, it was created out of greed. Just because it was law doesn't make it justifiable. I mean slavery was law... We know that was wrong.
And they didn't really find loopholes. They created them. There were not loopholes to be found, that implies that there was something in the law that allowed this to happen if they just found the loophole. Actually they created the law to work against Native people. It wasn't a loophole as much as it was obvious racism and oppression.
I am a Native woman. The consequences of this act are so devastating. And there really is no way to justify it.
2007-03-08 08:24:42 · answer #1 · answered by RedPower Woman 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Andrew Jackson is still glorified today for his pay off of the national debt. This was only possible due to the removal of the Indians. It was an unjust action and he faced heavy criticism for it at the time. In an 1832 U.S. Supreme Court decision it was ruled that Georgia could not impose its laws upon Cherokee tribal lands. To which Jackson replied, "John Marshall has made his decision, now let him enforce it!" One thing that you should not be confused on is that Jackson never forcibly removed any Indians from their land. The Trail of Tears happened in 1838 under his successor, Martin Van Buren although it was made possible by Jackson's legislation.
As to your question of whether or not the law could be repealed, yes. However it is a moot issue at this point. It could be done for posterity but would not change history as it went and could never occur again. One reason why it doesn't seem logical to repeal the act purely out of stance is that not only are we are facing much more serious problems that need our attention at this time, but it would cost a needless amount of money to do so.
Humans have made many mistakes throughout history. The best we can do is learn from them and go forward as we have done in this instance.
2007-03-08 04:12:49 · answer #2 · answered by Nationalist 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Anything is possible.NO, But for me being Native American it makes me sick just thinking about how many died and suffered. People wonder why Native American attacked villages it was bec US stole there land.
2007-03-08 04:33:56 · answer #3 · answered by Monet 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
the govt screwed the natives and now they are screwing all Americans of the united states for cheep labor.
2007-03-08 04:02:14 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
No.
2007-03-08 04:01:18 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋