What Caused the Jacksonain Government to force the Indians out of their territory?

Question

pleaseeeeeee help me with some ideas!

Answer 1

Jackson wanted to clear the land of indians so more americans could settle in the west. it wasnt the whole government that wanted to clear the land, it was mostly just jackson. for example, the supreme court actually ruled in favor of the cherokee twice, yet jackson completely ignored the court and still forced all indians off the land. jackson thought the indians didnt treat the land in the proper way and that whites could use the land much more effectively than the indians could. thus he forced the indians to move to indian country (oklahoma) so that whites could expand further.

he also sent them to oklahoma because it was believed that the area was "the great american desert" and therefore the u.s didnt want that land anyways

Answer 2

Jackson forced the Indians out of their territory because he was a champion of the people, or the common man. He didn't care about the what the Indians thought, but he knew that the farmers in the south wanted Indian land. So, he pushed the Indians out. Also, Jackson was a general before he was a President and fought the Indians.

Answer 3

The desire to expand the country west, and settle vast areas to the pacific.
It was realized that there was vast resources in the west, and by forcing the Indians out, and killing many of them, it was there for the taking.

Answer 4

The white population was expanding, people wanted the Indians' land, and the Indians kept resisting. It was pure racist greed.

Answer 5

This was less a Jackson forced issue than it was the State of Georgia. The State of Georgia attempted to remove the remaining Creek and Cherokee Indians from the Western portion of the State of Georgia. This saw Georgia openly flouting the authority of the federal treaties governing the Indians’ status and even threatening the use of force against United States troops.

This could occur at that time because the status of American Indians was left indefinite under the Constitution and by implication the Indians were almost outside of the constitutional system in that they were denied citizenship, exempt from taxation, and not counted in the apportionment of representation and direct taxes. Congress was authorized to merely regulate commerce with the Indian tribes.

In accordance with this policy, the federal government at the time of Georgia’s cession of her western domains had undertaken to secure for the State at federal expense all Indian lands lying within the State. The Indians were determined not to give up their homeland, and federal evacuation proceeded slowly.

Although by 1826 the Creeks had been “persuaded” by the federal government to cede all their lands except a small strip along the western border of the State, Georgia’s militant Governor George M. Troup nonetheless charged the federal government for failure to carry out its promises. President Adams threatened to use the army to restrain Georgia’s surveyors, the governor informed the President that such action would precipitate civil war and war was averted only by capitulation of the Creeks and their removal beyond the Mississippi.

A few years later saw the Cherokee Indians within Georgia attempt to organize themselves as an “independent nation. In 1827 the Cherokees within Georgia adopted a written constitution and proclaimed themselves an independent state, whereupon the Georgia legislature extended State law over Indian Territory, annulled all Indian law, and initiated the seizer if all Cherokee lands.

In accordance with the newly asserted jurisdiction, the State of Georgia tried and convicted a Cherokee (Corn Tassel) for murder. The United States Supreme Court shortly granted Corn Tassel a writ of error, but the State refused to honor it. Subsequently the State of Georgia executed the Indian.

Now as President, Jackson refused to take any action in defense of Indian Treaty Rights such as President Adams had done. Friends of the Cherokees sought an injunction in the Supreme Court to restrain Georgia from enforcing its laws over the Indians and from seizing their lands. In the case of ‘Cherokee Nation v. Georgia’ [1831] the Court held in an opinion written by Chief Justice Marshall that an Indian Tribe was neither a State in the Union nor a foreign nation within the meaning of the Constitution and therefore could not maintain an action in the federal courts. The opinion continued that the Indians were ‘domestic dependant nations’ under the sovereignty and dominion of the United States and that they had a right to the lands they occupied until title should be extinguished by voluntary cession to the United States.

The following year in the following year, in Worcester v. Georgia [1832] a case involving Sammuel Worcester’s conviction by the State for residence upon Indian lands without a license from the State, Marshall went further and held that the Cherokee nation was a distinct political community, having territorial boundaries within which the laws of Georgia have no force. Georgia refused wither to appear at the bar of the Court or to order Worcester’s release.

President Jackson refused to take any steps to implement the Court’s opinions in these cases, and it appeared that there was no practical way to force him to do so. In the Worcester case Marshall strongly implied that it was the President’s duty to uphold the appellant’s rights under federal law, to which Jackson is replied (with his infamous challenge) “John Marshall has made his decision, now let him enforce it.” Jackson in fact could rightfully claim some discretion in the choice of means of execution of laws, and in this instance he chose to pressure the Cherokees to sign new treaties providing for the cession of their lands and for migration to new lands.

The Cherokee had two significant aspects. In the first place, the mean and disgraceful treatment of the Cherokees by Georgia and Jackson constituted one of the great blots upon the character .of white American society in the nineteenth century. Of more immediate significance for American constitutional development was the ominous precedent set by Georgia’s deliberate defiance of federal authority.

While this would end with the Indians being removed from Georgia it was not a simple event of greed or Jackson acting presidential power. It was part of the evolution of defining the relationship between States and the federal government in areas not clearly defined by the Constitution.

Answer 6

greed

Answer 7

"manifest destiny"