How Did The Cherokee Tribe Resist Being Moved

How the Cherokee Tribe Resisted Being Moved

The Cherokee people mounted one of the most significant and multifaceted resistance movements against forced removal in American history. When the U.S. government implemented its Indian Removal policy in the 1830s, the Cherokee Nation responded with diplomatic efforts, legal challenges, political maneuvering, and ultimately heartbreaking perseverance in the face of overwhelming military force. Their resistance stands as a testament to the determination of Indigenous peoples to maintain their sovereignty, culture, and ancestral lands against encroaching American expansionism.

Early Diplomatic and Legal Resistance

The Cherokee began resisting removal almost immediately after the United States gained independence. As early as the 1780s, Cherokee leaders established diplomatic relations with the American government, signing numerous treaties that recognized their territorial boundaries. These agreements, including the 1791 Treaty of Holston and the 1795 Treaty of Philadelphia, promised that Cherokee lands would "remain theirs forever" as long as they maintained peaceful relations.

When pressure for removal intensified in the 1820s, the Cherokee adopted sophisticated strategies to protect their homeland. They established a constitutional government in 1827, modeled in part after the U.S. Constitution, with three branches of government and a written constitution. This move demonstrated their commitment to governance and their status as a sovereign nation. The Cherokee also embraced many aspects of American culture and education, believing that assimilation would strengthen their position. They developed a written language, created their own newspaper, The Cherokee Phoenix, and built schools, all in an effort to prove their "civilization" and worthiness to remain in their ancestral lands.

The Legal Battle: Cherokee Nation v. Georgia and Worcester v. Georgia

The Cherokee's most significant resistance came through the American legal system. In 1830, they hired prominent lawyer William Wirt to challenge Georgia's extension of state laws over Cherokee territory. This led to two landmark Supreme Court cases that represented the high point of Cherokee legal resistance.

In Cherokee Nation v. Georgia (1831), the Cherokee argued that they were a "domestic dependent nation" with a right to their lands. While Chief Justice John Marshall acknowledged their right to self-government, he ruled that the Cherokee were not a foreign nation and therefore could not bring their case directly to the Supreme Court. This decision was a setback, but the Cherokee persisted.

Their more successful case came in Worcester v. Georgia (1832), which challenged Georgia's attempt to assert jurisdiction over Cherokee territory and require non-Indians living there to obtain state permits. The Court ruled that Georgia's laws had no force within the Cherokee Nation and only the federal government—not individual states—had authority over Indian affairs. This decision was a major victory for the Cherokee, affirming their sovereignty and the unconstitutionality of Georgia's actions.

President Andrew Jackson, however, infamously refused to enforce the ruling, reportedly stating, "John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it." This lack of federal enforcement rendered the legal victory hollow, demonstrating that even when the Cherokee succeeded in court, political power ultimately determined their fate.

Internal Cherokee Divisions

The Cherokee resistance was complicated by internal divisions within the nation. As removal pressure mounted, a faction emerged that came to be known as the Treaty Party. Led by Major Ridge, his son John Ridge, and his nephew Elias Boudinot, this group believed that removal was inevitable and that negotiating the best possible terms might be the least terrible option.

The Treaty Party's position created deep rifts within the Cherokee Nation. Principal Chief John Ross and the majority of Cherokee people vehemently opposed removal, viewing it as a betrayal of their ancestors and their future. The National Council, led by Ross, passed resolutions condemning the Treaty Party's actions and declaring any treaty signed without the approval of the Cherokee government to be invalid.

These divisions weakened the Cherokee's unified resistance and created opportunities for the U.S. government to exploit. Despite these internal conflicts, the majority of Cherokee remained united in their opposition to removal, with Ross presenting thousands of signatures on petitions to Congress protesting the removal policy.

The Treaty of New Echota and Its Aftermath

In 1835, the U.S. government negotiated the Treaty of New Echota with a small group of Cherokee representatives, including members of the Treaty Party. Despite the fact that this group did not represent the Cherokee government or the will of the majority, the treaty was ratified by the U.S. Senate in 1836. It ceded all Cherokee lands east of the Mississippi River in exchange for land in Indian Territory (present-day Oklahoma) and compensation.

The Cherokee Nation immediately protested the treaty's legitimacy, but President Martin Van Buren ordered their removal to begin in 1838. Under the command of General Winfield Scott, approximately 7,000 Cherokee were forced from their homes at bayonet point and marched to Indian Territory. This horrific journey, known as the Trail of Tears, resulted in the deaths of an estimated 4,000 Cherokee due to exposure, disease, and starvation.

Final Resistance and Perseverance

Even during the forced removal, the Cherokee demonstrated remarkable resilience and resistance. Along the Trail of Tears, Cherokee people organized themselves as best they could, maintaining cultural practices and caring for one another. Some groups managed to escape and hide in the Appalachian Mountains, forming the basis of the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians that remains in North Carolina today.

Once in Indian Territory, the Cherokee immediately began rebuilding their government and society. They established schools, churches, and a constitutional government that incorporated many of the principles from their pre-removal governance. This rebuilding represented a form of cultural resistance—the determination to maintain their identity and way of life despite the trauma of removal.

Legacy of Cherokee Resistance

The Cherokee resistance to removal had lasting impacts that extend beyond their own community. Their legal battles established important precedents for tribal sovereignty that continue to influence federal Indian law today. The Worcester v. Georgia decision, in particular, remains a foundational case in the relationship between tribal nations and the United States.

The Cherokee experience also serves as a powerful example of Indigenous resistance and adaptation. Despite facing overwhelming military and political force, the Cherokee maintained their identity, governance, and culture. Their story demonstrates that resistance takes many forms—from legal challenges to cultural preservation—and that Indigenous peoples have always found ways to assert their sovereignty and dignity.

The Cherokee resistance also offers important lessons about American history and the complex relationship between the United States and Indigenous nations. It challenges the simplistic narrative of inevitable westward expansion and reveals the active agency of Native peoples in shaping their own destinies.

Conclusion

The Cherokee resistance to forced removal was a multifaceted struggle that spanned decades and involved diplomatic, legal, political, and cultural strategies. Despite ultimately being removed from their ancestral lands, the Cherokee demonstrated remarkable resilience and determination to maintain their sovereignty and identity. Their resistance serves as a testament to the strength of Indigenous peoples in the face of overwhelming adversity and continues to inspire Native and non-Native peoples alike who fight for justice and recognition of Indigenous rights today. The Cherokee story reminds us that resistance is not just about winning battles but about preserving culture, community, and dignity against all odds.

The echoes of their struggle resonate powerfully in contemporary Indigenous movements advocating for self-determination, land rights, and the revitalization of languages and traditions. Examining the Cherokee’s journey compels a deeper understanding of the systemic injustices inflicted upon Native American communities and underscores the ongoing need for reconciliation and respect. Furthermore, the Cherokee’s successful establishment of a functioning government in Indian Territory, built upon familiar structures and infused with a renewed commitment to democratic principles, offers a compelling counter-narrative to the prevailing colonial assumptions about Indigenous governance.

Beyond the political and legal ramifications, the Cherokee’s commitment to preserving their cultural heritage – from intricate basketry and storytelling to traditional ceremonies and agricultural practices – represents a profound act of defiance. It was a deliberate choice to nurture a vibrant identity amidst displacement and hardship, a testament to the enduring power of cultural memory. The establishment of Sequoyah’s syllabary, a crucial tool for literacy and self-expression, exemplifies this proactive approach to cultural preservation and solidified their ability to document and transmit their history and knowledge.

Ultimately, the Cherokee story is not simply one of loss and suffering, but a chronicle of profound resilience, strategic adaptation, and unwavering cultural fortitude. It’s a reminder that the fight for sovereignty and self-determination is a continuous process, demanding vigilance, advocacy, and a commitment to honoring the enduring legacy of Indigenous peoples. Their experience compels us to confront the uncomfortable truths of our nation’s past and to actively work towards a future built on justice, equity, and genuine partnership with all Indigenous nations.