Question
How does the Judicial Branch check the Executive Branch? In the textbook example about Andrew Jackson, what can happen when the Executive Branch disagrees with the Judicial Branch? Andrew Jackson disagreed with the Supreme Court’s decision to disallow removing the Cherokee tribe from their lands. What happened? What happened because of this decision?
Answers
GPT-4o mini
The Judicial Branch checks the Executive Branch primarily through its power of judicial review, which allows the courts to interpret the Constitution and assess the legality of executive actions. If the Executive Branch takes an action that the Judicial Branch deems unconstitutional, the courts can rule that action invalid.
In the historical context surrounding Andrew Jackson and the Cherokee Nation, there was a notable confrontation between the Executive and Judicial Branches. In 1832, the Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice John Marshall, ruled in *Worcester v. Georgia* that the state of Georgia could not impose its laws on the Cherokee Nation, essentially upholding the tribe's rights to their lands and asserting that the federal government had jurisdiction in matters related to Native American tribes.
However, Andrew Jackson famously disregarded the Supreme Court's ruling. It is often attributed to him (though possibly apocryphal), "John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it." This statement signifies Jackson's refusal to enforce the Court’s decision. Instead of complying with the ruling, Jackson's administration continued to pursue policies that led to the removal of the Cherokee and other tribes from their ancestral lands.
The result of Jackson's decision and the subsequent actions was the implementation of the Indian Removal Act of 1830, which led to the forced relocation of thousands of Native Americans from their homelands in the Southeast to designated "Indian Territory" in present-day Oklahoma. This tragic episode, known as the Trail of Tears, resulted in the suffering and death of many Cherokee and other Native Americans during the forced marches. It exemplifies the significant consequences that can arise when there is a conflict between the Executive and Judicial Branches of government.
In the historical context surrounding Andrew Jackson and the Cherokee Nation, there was a notable confrontation between the Executive and Judicial Branches. In 1832, the Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice John Marshall, ruled in *Worcester v. Georgia* that the state of Georgia could not impose its laws on the Cherokee Nation, essentially upholding the tribe's rights to their lands and asserting that the federal government had jurisdiction in matters related to Native American tribes.
However, Andrew Jackson famously disregarded the Supreme Court's ruling. It is often attributed to him (though possibly apocryphal), "John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it." This statement signifies Jackson's refusal to enforce the Court’s decision. Instead of complying with the ruling, Jackson's administration continued to pursue policies that led to the removal of the Cherokee and other tribes from their ancestral lands.
The result of Jackson's decision and the subsequent actions was the implementation of the Indian Removal Act of 1830, which led to the forced relocation of thousands of Native Americans from their homelands in the Southeast to designated "Indian Territory" in present-day Oklahoma. This tragic episode, known as the Trail of Tears, resulted in the suffering and death of many Cherokee and other Native Americans during the forced marches. It exemplifies the significant consequences that can arise when there is a conflict between the Executive and Judicial Branches of government.