answer:
the indian removal act was signed into law on may 28, 1830, by united states president andrew jackson. the law authorized the president to negotiate with southern native american tribes for their removal to federal territory west of the mississippi river in exchange for white settlement of their ancestral lands.[1][2][3] the act has been referred to as a unitary act of systematic genocide, because it discriminated against an ethnic group in so far as to make certain the death of vast numbers of its population.[4] the act was signed by andrew jackson and it was strongly enforced under his administration and that of martin van buren, which extended until 1841.[5]
the act was strongly supported by southern and northeastern populations, but was opposed by native tribes and the whig party. the cherokee worked together to stop this relocation, but were unsuccessful; they were eventually forcibly removed by the united states government in a march to the west that later became known as the trail of tears.in the early 1800s, the united states government began a systematic effort to remove american indian tribes from the southeast.[6] the chickasaw, choctaw, muscogee-creek, seminole, and original cherokee nations[7] had been established as autonomous nations in the southeastern united states.
this acculturation was originally proposed by george washington and was well under way among the cherokee and choctaw by the turn of the 19th century.[8] in an effort to assimilate with american culture, indians were encouraged to "convert to christianity; learn to speak and read english; and adopt european-style economic practices such as the individual ownership of land and other property (including, in some instances, the ownership of african slaves)."[9] thomas jefferson's policy echoed washington's proposition: respect the indians' rights to their homelands, and allow the five tribes to remain east of the mississippi provided that they adopt behavior and cultural practices that are compatible with those of other americans. jefferson encouraged practicing an agriculture-based society. andrew jackson sought to renew a policy of political and military action for the removal of the indians from these lands and worked toward enacting a law for indian removal.[10][11] in his 1829 state of the union address, jackson called for removal.[12]
the indian removal act was put in place to give to the southern states the land that indians had settled on. the act was passed in 1830, although dialogue had been ongoing since 1802 between georgia and the federal government concerning such an event. ethan davis states that "the federal government had promised georgia that it would extinguish indian title within the state's borders by purchase 'as soon as such purchase could be made upon reasonable terms'".[13] as time passed, southern states began to speed up the process by posing the argument that the deal between georgia and the federal government had no contract and that southern states could pass the law themselves. this scheme forced the national government to pass the indian removal act on may 28, 1830, in which president jackson agreed to divide the united states territory west of the mississippi into districts for tribes to replace the land from which they were removed.
in the 1823 case of johnson v. m'intosh, the united states supreme court handed down a decision stating that indians could occupy and control lands within the united states but could not hold title to those lands.[14] jackson viewed the union as a federation of highly esteemed states, as was common before the american civil war. he opposed washington's policy of establishing treaties with indian tribes as if they were foreign nations. thus, the creation of indian jurisdictions was a violation of state sovereignty under article iv, section 3 of the constitution. as jackson saw it, either indians comprised sovereign states (which violated the constitution) or they were subject to the laws of existing states of the union. jackson urged indians to assimilate and obey state laws. further, he believed that he could only accommodate the desire for indian self-rule in federal territories, which required resettlement west of the mississippi river on federal lands.[15][16]
support and opposition
