User:JuneAugust/切罗基诉佐治亚州案

维基百科，自由的百科全书
切罗基诉佐治亚州案
判决：1831年3月18日
案件全名切罗基民族 诉 佐治亚州
引註案號30 U.S. 1
8 L. Ed. 25; 1831 U.S. LEXIS 337
法庭判决
The Supreme Court does not have original jurisdiction to hear a suit brought by the Cherokee Nation, which is not a "foreign State" within the meaning of Article III
最高法院法官
首席大法官
约翰·马歇尔
法庭意见
多数意见马歇尔
联名：麦克莱恩
协同意见约翰逊
协同意见鲍德温
不同意见汤普森(joined by Story)
适用法条
美国宪法第三章

切罗基诉佐治亚州案（Cherokee Nation v. Georgia,30（英语：List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 30） U.S. 1 (1831)）是美国最高法院于1831年判决的一个案例。本案中，切罗基族寻求对乔治亚州通过的剥夺他们在该州境内权利的法律发起联邦禁令，但最高法院没有就案件的实质问题进行审理。法院裁定自己对此事没有原始管辖权，正如首席大法官马歇尔所说，因为切罗基族是一个依附的民族，与美国的关系就像“受监护人对其监护人”的关系。

背景资料[编辑]

历史[编辑]

Map of northeastern Georgia, showing Cherokee lands
Cherokee lands in 1830

几千年来，切罗基人一直生活在现在的美国东南部佐治亚州的地区。1542年，埃尔南多·德·索托进行了一次穿越美国东南部的探险，期间至少与三个切罗基族村庄有接触[1][2]。从1673年开始，英国移民开始与该部落进行贸易[3]。到1711年，英国人为了在塔斯卡洛拉战争中与塔斯卡洛拉人作战而向切罗基人提供枪支[4]。切罗基人与南卡罗来纳州和佐治亚州的英国殖民者之间贸易逐渐增加，到1740年代，切罗基人开始过渡到商业狩猎和农耕的生活方式[a][6]。1775年，有一个切罗基村庄被描述为有100座房屋，每座房屋都有花园、果园、温室和猪圈[7]。在与殖民者的战争后，切罗基人在1785年签署了一项和平条约[b][9]。1791年，威廉·布朗特代表美国与切罗基族领袖签署了霍尔斯顿条约[c][11]。

切罗基族[编辑]

在18世纪末19世纪初时，切罗基人仍在田纳西州、北卡罗来纳州、佐治亚州和阿拉巴马州拥有约53,000平方英里（140,000平方公里）的土地[12]。与此同时，渴望新土地的白人定居者敦促将切罗基人驱逐，并开发他们剩余的土地以供定居，这是美国在1802年向佐治亚州作出的承诺，即佐治亚州与切罗基人确实有条约[13]。时任美国总统托马斯·杰斐逊在这个时候也开始考虑将该部落从他们的土地上驱逐出去[14]。

国会投票通过了非常少的拨款以支持驱逐行动，但在詹姆斯·门罗总统的领导下政策发生了变化，他不赞成大规模的驱逐[15]。与此同时，切罗基人正在接受一些来自欧美文化的元素[d]。在此期间直到1816年，切罗基人签署了许多其他条约。在每个条约中，他们割让土地给美国，并允许修建穿越切罗基领地的道路，但也保留了霍尔斯顿条约的条款[17]。

On December 20, 1828, the state legislature of Georgia, fearful that the United States would not enforce (as a matter of Federal policy) the removal of the 切羅基人 from their historic lands in the state, enacted a series of laws which stripped the Cherokee of their rights under the laws of the state. They intended to force the Cherokee to leave the state. In this climate, John Ross, Principal Chief of the Cherokee Nation, led a delegation to Washington in January 1829 to resolve disputes over the failure of the US government to pay annuities to the Cherokee, and to seek Federal enforcement of the boundary between the territory of the state of Georgia and the Cherokee Nation's historic tribal lands within that state. Rather than lead the delegation into futile negotiations with President Jackson, Ross wrote an immediate memorial to Congress, completely forgoing the customary correspondence and petitions to the President.

Ross found support in Congress from individuals in the 国民共和党, such as senators 亨利·克莱, Theodore Frelinghuysen, and 丹尼尔·韦伯斯特, as well as representatives Ambrose Spencer and David (Davy) Crockett. Despite this support, in April 1829, 约翰·伊顿, the secretary of war (1829–1831), informed Ross that President Jackson would support the right of Georgia to extend its laws over the Cherokee Nation. In May 1830, Congress endorsed Jackson's policy of removal by passing the 印第安人迁移法案, which authorized the president to set aside lands west of the 密西西比河 to exchange for the lands of Indian nations in the east.

When Ross and the Cherokee delegation failed to protect Cherokee lands through negotiation with the executive branch and through petitions to Congress, Ross challenged the actions of the federal government through the U.S. courts.

The case[编辑]

In June 1830, a delegation of Cherokee led by Chief John Ross, selected (at the urging of Senators 丹尼尔·韦伯斯特 and Theodore Frelinghuysen), William Wirt, attorney general in the Monroe and Adams administrations, to defend Cherokee rights before the U.S. Supreme Court. The Cherokee Nation asked for an injunction, claiming that Georgia's state legislation had created laws that "go directly to annihilate the Cherokees as a political society." In court the Cherokee Nation wasn’t quite sure how the state of Georgia should treat them. They weren’t sure if that nation was either sovereign or a tribe. Georgia pushed hard to bring evidence that the Cherokee Nation couldn’t sue as a “foreign” due to that they did not have a constitution or a strong central government. Wirt argued that "the Cherokee Nation [was] a foreign nation in the sense of our constitution and law" and was not subject to Georgia's jurisdiction. Wirt asked the Supreme Court to void all Georgia laws extended over Cherokee lands on the grounds that they violated the U.S. Constitution, United States-Cherokee treaties, and United States intercourse laws.

The Court did hear the case but declined to rule on the merits. The Court determined that the framers of the Constitution did not really consider the Indian Tribes as foreign nations but more as "domestic dependent nation[s]" and consequently the Cherokee Nation lacked the standing to sue as a "foreign" nation. Chief Justice Marshall said; "The court has bestowed its best attention on this question, and, after mature deliberation, the majority is of the opinion that an Indian tribe or nation within the United States is not a foreign state in the sense of the constitution, and cannot maintain an action in the courts of the United States. " [CHEROKEE NATION v. STATE OF GA., 30 U.S. 1 (1831)] The Court held open the possibility that it yet might rule in favor of the Cherokee "in a proper case with proper parties".

Chief Justice 约翰·马歇尔 wrote that "the relationship of the tribes to the United States resembles that of a ‘ward to its guardian'."[18]

后果[编辑]

法院判决对切罗基部落带来了严酷的后果。The aftermath of the court ruling was hard for the Cherokee nation. The relocation and route they took was called the infamous 此次搬迁历程以及路线被称之为臭名昭著的“血泪之路”。据统计有接近四分之一的切罗基族人死于途中。 There have been counts of close to one-fourth of the Cherokee nation died on the journey. 他们被迁往现今俄克拉荷马州的“印第安人保留地”。

相关条目[编辑]

脚注[编辑]

注释[编辑]

  1. ^ At the same time, the tribe began to move from autonomous villages and towns, to a more centralized government.[5]
  2. ^ This was the Treaty of Hopewell, which provided that whites could not settle on Indian land, and included the right to send a delegate to Congress.[8]
  3. ^ The treaty provided that the Cherokee would be under the protection of the United States, land boundaries would be established, that the Cherokee land would be protected from settlement and under their own government, that crimes committed against the Cherokee would be punished according to Cherokee law, and the tribe would hand over (extradite) criminals to the United States.[10]
  4. ^ By 1809 the tribe had a permanent police force, in 1817 the tribe had established a bicameral legislature, and by 1827 they had a written constitution and court.[16]

参考来源[编辑]

  1. ^ Robert J. Conley, The Cherokee Nation: A History 18-19 (2005)
  2. ^ Russell Thornton, C. Matthew Snipp, & Nancy Breen, The Cherokees: A Population History 10-11 (1992).
  3. ^ Conley, supra at 21-22; Thornton, supra at 19.
  4. ^ Grace Steele Woodward, The Cherokees 34 (1963); Conley, supra at 26.
  5. ^ Conley, supra at 41.
  6. ^ Conley, supra at 40-41.
  7. ^ Woodward, supra at 48.
  8. ^ 2 Indian Affairs: Laws and Treaties 8 (Charles J. Kappler, ed. 1904); Emmet Starr, History of the Cherokee Indians and their Legends and Folklore 35 (1922).
  9. ^ Treaty with the Cherokee 1785, Nov. 28, 1785, 7 Stat. 18
  10. ^ 2 Indian Affairs, supra at 29.
  11. ^ Treaty with the Cherokee of 1791, July 2, 1791, 7 Stat. 39.
  12. ^ Rachel Caroline Eaton, John Ross and the Cherokee Indians 7 (1914).
  13. ^ Cherokee Removal: Before and After xi (William L. Anderson, ed. 1992).
  14. ^ Eaton, supra at 21.
  15. ^ Eaton, supra at 22.
  16. ^ William G. McLoughlin, Cherokee Ghost Dance: Essays on the Southeastern Indians, 1789-1861 74-76 (1984); Eaton, supra at 17.
  17. ^ Eaton, supra at 20.
  18. ^ Wilkinson, C. (1988). American Indians, Time, and the Law: Native Societies in a Modern Constitutional Democracy, Yale University Press

参考书目[编辑]

  • Anton-Herman Chroust, "Did President Andrew Jackson Actually Threaten the Supreme Court of the United States with Non-enforcement of Its Injunction Against the State of Georgia?," 4 Am. J. Legal Hist. 77 (1960).
  • Kenneth W. Treacy, "Another View on Wirt in Cherokee Nation", 5 Am. J. Legal Hist. 385 (1961).
  • “The Cherokee Nation Vs. The State Of Georgia." Cherokee Nation Vs. The State Of Georgia (2009): 1. MasterFILE Premier. Web. 20 Feb. 2012.
  • Cherokee Nation v. Georgia." Great American Court Cases. Ed. Mark Mikula and L. Mpho Mabunda. Vol. 4: Business and Government. Detroit: Gale, 1999. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 20 Feb. 2012.

拓展阅读[编辑]

外部链接[编辑]

Template:Cherokee Template:Native American rights Template:Aboriginal title in the United States

取自“https://zh.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:JuneAugust/切罗基诉佐治亚州案&oldid=78471401”