easingly removal under compulsion after his term, resulting in a deteriorating relationship between the Native Americans and the government and erupting oftentimes into bloody battles like the Battle of Tippecanoe and the loyalty of the American Indians to the British in the War of 1812 (Harrell 261-262)
Jefferson had misgiving about the Louisiana Purchase because of serious constitutional issue attached to it. However, he viewed it as vital strategically to the US because of the New Orleans port directly accessing the Mississippi River, outlet for American trade with the outside world. He feared France’s control of the Mississippi. Thus, he justified the Purchase as an exercise of extra-constitutional power by the presidency (Harrell et al 247-248).
Q1b. Discuss the impact of the Louisiana Purchase and Andrew Jackson’s removal policies on the Native Americans. Discuss the long term impact of Worcester v. Georgia on both Native Americans and the checks and balances system.
In 1830, Congress passed the Indian Removal Act, a law strongly supported by President Andrew Jackson. The Act provided for the voluntary removal of the North American Indians from the east of the Mississippi to the west of it. The Louisiana Purchase in 1803 had long encouraged the belief that this was possible. The removal law worsened the tension between the North American Indians and the United States which was already palpable even before its enactment as can be evinced from cases like the Cherokee Nation v Georgia, 30 US 1 , and Worcester v Georgia, 31 US 515  (Norgren et al 6-7).
The Worcester case, together with the Cherokee Nation case, established the legal framework with which the American Indians are to be governed with respect to their political and property rights. In the Worcester case, Chief Justice Marshall declared the possessory rights of the Cherokee Indians, a right which they can however relinquish in favor of the White Americans. The implication of the