But the indians were part of sovereign nations, not citizens of any of the united states. Had AJs actions been against citizens the unconstitutional argument would have better muster. His actions in regards the indians, in a legal sense, were more like treaty violations, if anything.
If that’s the case, then Jackson’s actions in regards the Indians, in a legal sense, were more like acts of war without just cause, without provocation and and without an act of Congress, and a violation of a Supreme Court ruling which would have restrained his aggressions, (thus doubly un-Constitutional), as well as trespassing, theft, fraud, aggravated assault, arson, kidnapping, and murder.