Explanations Of Public Law 280

He argues that it is likely to have cases to arise and involve other states or foreigners, making it necessary federal

In the 1930s the federal government had put in place a set of policies know as the Indian New Deal. Natives of the Northwest Coast were encouraged to adopt governmental forms and constitutions to establish relations. The government had the final say in how tribes were coordinated, they controlled who sat in chairs of power and how things would be running. Following the 1950s federal policies towards the Indian people continue to vacillate. During the last past two decades of the twentieth century the tribes of Washington have been still making attempts to have the terms of the 1850 honored by the state and federal governments mostly in regards to fishing rights, to bring economic stability to the Native community through the utilization of

(Document F). Document F was created to make sure that all of the Acts were kept in place. All of the Acts were created by the New Nation to have the Indians scare the British like the British had done before but the British did it in a more calming way. As usual the policies were broken even though they were put on paper. People’s attitude changed toward the Indians, the military was used to persuade the Indians into giving up their land, illegally according to the treaties and policies that were made and signed.

The Act led to an array of legal and moral arguments for and against the need to relocate the Indians westward from the agriculturally productive lands of the Mississippi in Georgia and parts of Alabama. This paper compares and contrasts the major arguments for and against the

Seminole defiance of federal and Creek tribal pressures contributed to their right to govern themselves, define their own membership and property; and regulate their business and domestic

Was the Indian Removal Act Justified? “Any law which violates the inalienable rights of man is essentially unjust and tyrannical; it is not a law at all” (Maximilien Robespierre). The Indian Removal Act of 1830 authorized negotiation between the United States of America and the Five Civilized Tribes in the southeast for the acquisition of their lands. Andrew Jackson signed it in to gain territory for agriculture as well as to appease Georgia, as tensions are high between the state and the Cherokee.

Although some Supreme Court cases have helped to explicitly establish some powers of the national government, there are many spheres where states make decisions on their own and some aspects in which the national and federal government coincide. The “picket fence” refers to the overlap of national and states’ rights and how they work collectively on these issues. Even though the national government is a powerful entity, it is still kept in check by the states and by its various branches. Rather than having very outlined restrictions, the states and national government work together for the bettering of the nation. Also, the national government has allowed states to keep autonomy with block grants, which allow them to choose how to spend their funds to better assist their citizens.

It was not long after the enforcement of these laws that dispute arose from them. All fifty U.S. states were trying to grasp these laws and figure out what do about them. People quickly thought that the four laws were unconstitutional, and something had to be done about it.

The most important law was that there were to be no slaves in the new territory. Any people living in the Northwest territory had to be free people. Religion is also encouraged and recommends using the Bible in teaching. Ironically, it declares that no Indian territory shall be seized. Americans thought they

To make matters worse, the State governments joined the colonists in this effort to drive Native Americans out of the South by passing laws to limit the Indians rights. These laws violated and prohibited the Indians from being prosperous in “the land of the

The federal government now had a foothold on the tribal reservations. Major crimes on reservations were now policed by the Feds. At the writing of the law this included 7 crimes. These crimes included murder, rape, arson, manslaughter, assault with deadly intent, larceny and burglary. Amendments to this law added the crimes of kidnapping, robbery, incest, assault with a dangerous weapon, assault resulting in serious bodily injury, and sexual relations

Criminalization affected the rights of Alaska Natives such as the Tlingit much as it did the Indians in Canada and the lower United States. Sovereignty, fishing and hunting rights for subsistence, and the allowance of potlatches were especially prevalent. An 1872 Alaska court ruling gave Natives the same rights as non-Indians but didn’t recognize Native legal or political institutions. The sovereignty of Alaskan Native tribes was not recognized so the state asserted their own sovereignty and, defying the federal laws, claimed complete jurisdiction over the Natives living within their borders.

This fight found its way to federal courts, where it was resolved. The resolution stated that states did not have authority to regulate Indian gaming, but rather the federal government had ultimate authority. This ruling led to the Indian Gaming Act

Is Andrew Jackson a hero or villain? I believe that Andrew Jackson is a Villain. The reasons I feel this way because he killed off THOUSANDS of Native Americans and pillaged their land. He abused his power.

Calhoun views compromise as a bad thing. He sees it as a dividing factor rather than a uniting factor. He uses the specific example of the division of the military to show that compromise is bad and it will ultimately cause the defense to of the country to weaken. Examples of past failed compromises are the Missouri Compromise and Clay’s proposed compromise in 1821. 8.