New York – Although he sees any process to overturn the Insular Cases of the Supreme Court of the United States and their application in territories such as Puerto Rico as long and complicated, pro-statehood activist George Laws García considered that it is one of the steps in the right direction to end the racist and discriminatory treatment against citizens on the island.
In an interview with El Diario de NY, Laws García, executive director of the Puerto Rico Statehood Council (PRSC), highlighted that other organizations in the diaspora are evaluating presenting cases in order to begin a process to revoke the doctrine that dates back to the last century.
“There has to be another case that reaches the Supreme Court where the question specifically lends itself to a decision in which one of the options is to overturn the insular cases. That has been the challenge,” he explained.
To questions about how or by whom the case would have to reach the Supreme Court, he responded: “Cases reach the Supreme Court in a variety of ways; It could be the government of Puerto Rico; It could be an interested party in a local case that has a federal nexus that can then rise; It could be some activist organization. Obviously, in PR we have the presence of organizations… that more recently have been involved in that type of effort such as ‘Right to Democracy’, and we also have individual activist lawyers who have advanced this issue such as Gregorio Igartúa; so there are a variety of different ways a case could get to that forum.”
The interviewee added that litigation of this type can last for years.
“Obviously that is a process that takes years, because you have to first go through the first instance forum, then the appeals court, then they have to present the motion to the Supreme Court. So there has to be a majority within the Supreme Court that has to be willing to consider that case. And that is a big challenge,” he argued.
The Fitisemanu case against the United States
The Supreme Court could have overturned the Insular Cases after the filing of Fitisemanu v. United States.
However, in October 2022, the court refused to accept certiorari where it was requested to annul the doctrine as part of that case.
The appeal sought for the highest forum to resolve whether people born in American Samoa, another US territory, are US citizens.
Although a district judge in Utah ruled in 2019 that residents of American Samoa were eligible for citizenship under the 14th Amendment to the federal Constitution, the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals disagreed with the ruling.
US versus Vaello Madero and the exclusion of Puerto Ricans from SSI
Fitisemanu versus the US came before the Supreme Court shortly after the US versus Vaello Madero. In this instance, the Supreme Court (8-10) reversed the decision of the First Circuit Court of Appeals that established that the US Constitution does not require Congress to extend the Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits of the Social Security Administration (SSA) to US citizens in Puerto Rico.
Judge Sonia Sotomayor, of Puerto Rican origin, presented the only dissenting opinion.
Puerto Rican José Luis Vaello-Madero received disability benefits while living in New York. Upon moving to the island, the SSA discontinued payments under the program.
The Supreme Court ruling establishes that the US government did not violate the constitutional clause of Equal Protection and other rights by excluding citizens in Puerto Rico from the SSI program, because this population does not pay all federal taxes.
“The Vaello-Madero case is extremely important for the reason that it indicates that, regardless of whether Congress has the capacity and authority to give equal treatment to PR in any federal law, at any time in the future, Congress You can revoke that. So what it indicates is that it makes it completely clear and evident that, as long as PR continues to be a territory, at any time, it can be taken away from PR. Tomorrow, if Congress wanted, they could reduce the money they give in Medicaid in PR or Delete the program in its entirety. That is something that could happen; Congress has the authority to do it,” Laws García analyzed.
The idea behind the doctrine is that unincorporated territories like Puerto Rico are part of the United States but not equal.
In the opinion of the activist, the “racist” legal framework on which decisions like these of the Supreme Court are based, added to other federal legal impositions such as the Fiscal Control Board (FOMB), what have demonstrated is the territorial relationship between the United States .and Puerto Rico.
“The case of Sánchez Valle and the new Insular Cases as they call it, that of Vaello Madero, those of the Board (of Fiscal Control) and the existence of (the Law) PROMESA, and also the result of Hurricane María, all of this has created clarity about what the territorial nature is, and I believe that different groups have found that the insular cases are something that can be presented publicly to illustrate the racist roots of political domination that exist within the US colonial territorial relationship .and Puerto Rico,” he explained.
Along with the effort to repeal the doctrine, the lobbyist also warned about the reality that at the end of the day, as a result of the Territorial Clause of the US Constitution, it is the plenary powers of Congress that determine the laws and regulations in PR
“The challenge that I see with that is, we are going to say that they are successful and the insular cases are revoked, because you are presenting a situation where the nefarious nature of this network of legal decisions and this legal background that has allowed Puerto Rico and the other territories continue to be treated in this way. But that does not take away the power that is within the Constitution, which is the plenary powers of Congress over the territories. The Constitution is going to go on to say that Congress will have the power to make all necessary laws and regulations regarding the territories, period. So they remove the insular cases, but what is the starting point of territorial colonialism? ”He questioned.
In that sense, Laws García insisted on the need to promote a decolonization process from the federal Congress in view of the fact that the Island Cases provide justification to continue supporting the territorial colonial model in Puerto Rico.
“For me, the exhibition of the Island Cases has value to the extent that it exposes what has to be solved, but it does not present a solution in itself. That is why (it is necessary) the direct route of working with Congress to present a project, in my opinion it is what is most viable and more concrete than what you are advancing… If you pass legislation, and that legislation becomes law , then you already have something established that is a mechanism to resolve the issue,” he stated.
“You can spend four or six years working on a case, you get to the Supreme Court, you get the decision, the decision is successful, and that still doesn’t necessarily connect with a resolution to the issue. And that is the frustration that I sometimes express when I share with other colleagues who are extremely dedicated to that route. But, I understand why they are doing it, because it is important to continue developing awareness at the national level and in the media of the need to resolve these issues, and that is an avenue that exists to try to make that achievement,” he continued.
Groups like the one Laws García leads are promoting the Puerto Rico Status Act, with versions in both the House of Representatives and the Senate in Washington DC for a binding plebiscite between the options of statehood, independence or freedom association. Although the first version of the bill, HR 8393, was approved by majority Democrats in December 2022, none of the more recent measures have moved down to the appropriate committees in the respective legislative bodies.
Currently, the focus of leaders, mostly statesmen, is on the Senate with the search for more co-sponsors to Bill 3231 presented by Martin Heinrich, Democrat of New Mexico.
However, the road looks steep given the proximity of the elections and the refusal of the Republicans to address the issue.
Historic report of the Civil Rights Commission on Insular Cases in Puerto Rico
Last February, the United States Commission on Civil Rights (USCCR) released a memorandum that includes opinions and proposals from individuals and interest groups on the effects of the Insular Cases and the Unincorporated Territory Doctrine on the civil rights of residents. of the island.
The publication of the USCCR Advisory Committee, established in 2022, collects the feelings of experts on the subject and representatives of civil society from different approaches; historical, legal, etc.
Laws García was one of the panelists at the forum held in San Juan, the island’s capital, on May 10 that served as the basis for the report.
The document released on February 12 is the first that the Commission translates into Spanish.
“The testimonies capture a wide range of information, from the historical context of the Insular Cases and the relationship between Puerto Rico and the federal government, to the effects on the quality of life of people impacted by the lack of full access to public programs. federal agencies, such as older adults, veterans, and individuals with disabilities,” reads a summary of the draft document.
The Commission will soon publish the final report.
For Laws García, it is of utmost importance that the Civil Rights Commission is addressing the issue.
“Since 1957, the Commission on Civil Rights under President Dwight David Eisenhower was established specifically to be a bipartisan entity within the federal Executive to find the facts of what is happening with the different elements of citizens’ civil rights to throughout the American nation as a whole, and as a result of the recommendations that that Commission made to Congress, extremely important legislation was passed, including aspects of the Voting Rights Act and the Civil Rights Act, so what has been developed and is “It has been presented to the American public and to Congress, it has had a direct impact in exposing the need for what needs to be addressed and in presenting different options that can be addressed,” he added.
The process is more relevant given that, although there is an executive order to create the President’s Working Group on the Status of Puerto Rico, the organization is not active, so the USCCR is the only entity within the Executive serving the moment, specifically, the issue of the Island Cases.
In the interview with El Diario, Laws García also answered questions about the pro-statehood movement in the federal capital; here you can read the story
Keep reading:
Puerto Rican activists in Washington DC assure that there is no appetite in Congress to advance the status issue
Director of PRFAA: The issue of the status of Puerto Rico in Washington is not a race, it is a marathon