Identity (Psychology)--Puerto Rico, Ethnicity--Puerto Rico, and Self-determination, National--Puerto Rico
The precise legal nature of the relationship between the United States and the people of Puerto Rico was not explicitly determined in 1898 when the Treaty of Paris transferred sovereignty over Puerto Rico from Spain to the United States. Since then, many court cases, beginning in 1901, have been instrumental in defining this delicate relationship.While the legislation has clearly established the nonexistence of Puerto Rican nationhood and lack of independent Puerto Rican citizenship, the debate over Puerto Rico's status continues to this day.Malavet offers a critique of Puerto Rico's current status as well as of its treatment by the U.S. legal and political systems. Puerto Rico is a colony of the United States, and Puerto Ricans living on this geographically separate island are subject to the United States's legal and political authority. They are the largest group of U.S. citizens currently living under territorial status. Malavet argues that the Puerto Rican cultural nation experiences U.S. imperialism, which compromises both the island's sovereignty and Puerto Ricans'citizenship rights. He analyzes the three alternatives to Puerto Rico's continued territorial status, examining the challenges manifest in each possibility, as well as illuminating what he believes to be the best course of action.
Mississippi Law Journal, 2010/10/01, Vol: 80, p181
constitutional law, contracts law, governments, international law, and international trade law
INTRODUCTION Boumediene v. Bush , resolved by the Supreme Court in June of 2008, ruled that so-called "enemy combatants" held by the United States at Guantanamo Bay Naval Station have a constitutionally-guaranteed right to habeas corpus review of their detention by federal courts. 2 In reaching this result, the majority opinion relied upon what it labeled the "doctrine" of the Insular Cases, 3 a series of decisions arising mostly as a result of the Spanish-American War of 1898. While they disagreed on whether or not the rule should apply to Guantanamo, the dissenting justices and those in the majority unanimously agreed that the over-a-century-old rule of the Insular Cases--that in order to permit substantial discretion to the executive and legislative branches of government to deal with new territories and their inhabitants, some, but not all, of the provisions of the U.S. Constitution apply ex proprio vigore in our territorial possessions--is still good law. Most observers will not know the real context of the old cases, and the current Supreme Court neglects to acknowledge the continuing effect of those decisions on over four million citizens of the United States who have lived with the rule of the Insular Cases for the 109 years since it was first articulated in Downes v. Bidwell . 4 This article seeks to start to remedy those shortcomings by presenting the Insular Cases in their historical and sociological context to illustrate how the Court's interpretation of the Territorial Clause constitutionally "inconveniences" the territorial citizens by ...