Abstract
Johnson v. M’Intosh1 is the first case in Chief Justice John Marshall’s trilogy of Indian law opinions.2 Two centuries later, these decisions remain the foundation of the legal, political, and sovereign status of Indian tribes within the United States. While concluding that both the property rights and sovereign powers of Indigenous nations are inferior to the property rights and sovereign powers of Christian European nations, Johnson specifically held that “Indians”3 lack the right to fully alienate their lands to anyone other than the United States government.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Title of host publication | Feminist Judgments |
| Subtitle of host publication | Rewritten Property Opinions |
| Publisher | Cambridge University Press |
| Pages | 35-60 |
| Number of pages | 26 |
| ISBN (Electronic) | 9781108890922 |
| ISBN (Print) | 9781108835534 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Jan 1 2021 |
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- General Social Sciences
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Commentary on Johnson v. M’Intosh'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Standard
- Harvard
- Vancouver
- Author
- BIBTEX
- RIS