The Sovereignty Tug-of-War

Is the issue American Indian Sovereignty or a tug-of-war over states rights?

The cases that led to the Marshall Trilogy and the basis for future American Indian Law in the US stemmed from the state of Georgia applying pressure against the Cherokee nation in an effort to take their land. However, while these decisions found against a state's right to impose law on Indian reservations, they moved away from the idea of of inherent American Indian sovereignty and instead characterized Indian nations as wards of the federal government.

Most of the major Supreme Court cases involving American Indian nations have revolved around states attempting to assert rights over Indian nations in areas of civil and criminal law or taxation. The federal government usually takes the position of protecting Indian sovereignty from encroachment by the states by asserting its own authority. However, the Marshall Trilogy's characterization of American Indian tribes as "wards of the federal government" and establishment of the trust status of their lands simply replaced state powers with federal powers, negating the idea of inherent American Indian sovereignty and placing Indian nations under the plenary power of the US Government. Consequently, for the federal government, the sovereignty issue has served as a way to diminish states rights while giving little away to American Indian nations