history term paper
... Worcester appealed to the Supreme Court, stating that the right to get a permit to live on a Native American reservation was going against national law. National law states that Native Americans have the right to self govern on reservation lands, and that they have the right to create laws and enforce them as they see fit. The supreme court found Georgia Guilty of infringing on federal jurisdiction by violating the national governments treaties with the Indian nation that guaranteed the native Americans the right to govern there own land. After the trial, Georgia could no longer force people to acquire permits to live on Indian land because that right was reserved for the Indian nations. Only the federal government has the power to limit or override an Indian reservation, not a state. The Supreme Court reversed and annulled the sentence issued to Worcester and he was free to go. The United States Supreme Court decided upon this on March 3, 1832. This law is still in affect to the current date. During World War I, the United States government was utilizing the draft to recruit soldiers. A draft is a system or act of selecting certain individuals who meet criteria for military purposes without individuals consent. Schenck, a United States citizen, opposed the draft. Schenck was accused of mailing circulars, approximately 15,000 of them, which were intended to be circulated to World War I draftees. The circulars suggested that the draft was unconstitutional and wrong and went against the rights of every soldier that was drafted. The circulars urged draftees “not to submit to intimidation”, (Paddock, pg. 122) but advised to do so in a non-violent way, such as petitioning or repealing the Conscription act. Schenck also said that the draft was in direct violation with an individuals civil rights as a citizen of the United States, guaranteed by the constitution and the bill of rights. Schenck was charged with conspiracy to violate the Espionage Act of June 15, 1917 by causing and attempting to cause insubordination in the military and obstruct the recruiting and enlistment service. He was also charged with unlawfully using the mail to circulate his letter, which is in direct violation of title 12, 2 June 15 1917. (Comp. St. 1918, PG 321) The defendant was found guilty on all accounts. Schenck later repealed, arguing that the federal government does not have the right to abridge or limit the freedom of speech and press, as clearly stated in the first amendment of the constitution as appears: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” According to Schenck, being charged with conspiracy to violate the Espionage Act is unconstitutional and therefore should not be charged with any crime. The Supreme Court concluded that Schenck is not protected in this particular case. The basis of every case depends on the circumstances surrounding the situation at hand. The question in this particular matter is whether the words used are of such a nature as to create a clear and present danger that may bring about insubordination and revolt amongst the general public and that congress has a responsibility and a right to prevent. Congress stated that the first amendment, freed...