Question

How does worcester v. georgia relate to judicial review?

Answer 1

Worcester v. Georgia relates to judicial review because it established the principle of tribal sovereignty and showed the power of the Supreme Court to review and overturn state laws. The ruling differed from Cherokee Nation v. Georgia in its recognition of the Cherokee's sovereign rights.

Step-by-step explanation:

In Worcester v. Georgia, Chief Justice John Marshall ruled in favor of Samuel Worcester, establishing the principle of tribal sovereignty. This case relates to judicial review because it showed that the Supreme Court has the power to review and overturn state laws that are found to be unconstitutional. The ruling in Worcester v. Georgia differed from Cherokee Nation v. Georgia because it recognized the Cherokee as distinct political communities with sovereign rights, whereas Cherokee Nation v. Georgia did not recognize them as a foreign nation.

Answer 2

Worcester v. Georgia directly relates to judicial review as it demonstrates both the power of the Supreme Court to declare laws unconstitutional and its dependence on other government branches for enforcement of rulings, as evidenced by President Andrew Jackson's noncompliance with the Court's decision.

Step-by-step explanation:

The case Worcester v. Georgia has a significant relationship with the concept of judicial review, which is the principle that allows the Supreme Court to review and invalidate laws that are unconstitutional. In this instance, Worcester v. Georgia is often held as an example of the power and limitations of judicial review. In the case, despite the Supreme Court ruling that Georgia's laws regarding the Cherokee Nation were unconstitutional, President Andrew Jackson refused to enforce the court's decision, dramatically illustrating that judicial review's effectiveness relies on the other branches of government for enforcement.

Learn more about Worcester v. Georgia