Why did the Native Americans not feel threatened with removal by the army?

The judicial branch had supported their position.
The president was too weak to take action.
It was a state issue and not a federal issue.
They could fight the army if they needed to do so.

The judicial branch had supported their position.

Explanation: As a last resort they planned to bring suit before the Supreme Court because they felt that why should they be expelled from their lands when they no longer threatened white settlements and could compete with them on many levels? They intended to fight their ouster, and they figured they had many ways to do it.

The Supreme Court ruled that The Native Americans were “domestic dependent nations,” subject to the United States as a ward to a guardian. The territory was part of the United States but not subject to action by individual states. However, the missionaries encouraged them to stand fast. When the Native Americans read Marshall’s decision, they had honestly believed that the Nation had won the case, that Georgia lacked authority to control their lives and property, and that the courts would protect them.

as university of miami psychologists debra lieberman and adam smith pointed out in a recent article in the journal current directions in psychological science, humans have social and psychological mechanisms to deter incest. with very few exceptions, marriages between brothers and sisters and between parents and their children are verboten in every human culture. the primary psychological anti-incest mechanism is the yuck response. even the idea of sex with their mom or dad, bro or sis is upsetting to most people. the psychologist jonathan haidt has found that nearly everyone is repelled by the prospect of brother-sister sex, even in hypothetical situations in which there is no chance of pregnancy).

the biological cost of incest

this raises an interesting question: just what’s so bad about incest? sure, having sex with your dad or your sister seems gross — but why? some anthropologists have argued that incest taboos are learned social conventions. this explanation, however, doesn’t make sense to me as it does not explain the widespread existence of anti-incest mechanisms in creatures ranging from cockroaches to chimpanzees. second, the incest taboo is about as close to a universal law as human moral rules get.

why should mechanisms to avoid incest be so widespread both in nature and across human societies? the answer is simple. the problem with having sex close with relatives is that there is an astonishingly high chance that your offspring will be born with a serious birth defect.

i believe the answer is:   psychological  experiment

in this experiment, wilhelm wundt became the first person that implement scientific method in analyzing the pyschological phenomenon.

due to this result, wilhelm wundt also able to make psychology to be acknowledged as a separate scientific field from biology.