SCOTUS Oral Arguments in Puerto Rico Double Jeopardy and Sovereignty Case

The Supreme Court of the United States ^ | 01/13/16

[cll]

The argued case relates to the matter of the sovereignty (or lack of) of the several territories of the United States (Puerto Rico, Guam, US Virgin Islands, American Samoa and the Northern Mariana Islands) in a double-jeopardy case.

In essence, the Puerto Rico Supreme Court Court ruled that the island is under the total control of the U.S. Congress according to the territorial clause of the U.S. Constitution and that as such, it lacks the sovereignty of a regular U.S. State, and that because of that a defendant already tried in the federal district court cannot be tried for the same crimes in a Puerto Rico court since there exists no dual sovereignty in the territories. This Puerto Rico decision is being appealed by the Puerto Rico government before the SCOTUS.

[cll]

Very interesting oral arguments and queries by the Justices which indicate that a status change may be forced in the near future, since the federal government in essence has admitted that it holds colonies (see my profile for Justice Harlan's dissent in the early 20th century Insular Cases).

[cll]

Puerto Rico Ping! Please Freepmail me if you want on or off the list.

[PAR35]

Interesting legal issue.

[reed13k]

Yes, but doesn’t the territory have to initiate the transition to statehood through petition to congress and not the federal government per the prior legislation?

Constituion says this:
“New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new State shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or Parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress.

The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States; and nothing in this Constitution shall be so construed as to Prejudice any Claims of the United States, or of any particular State.”

So I’m not sure why Congress would be forced to do anything since it is left as “may be admitted by Congress” and “Congress Shall have power to dispose of ...”. If they’ve established the means to transition for the territory and the territory hasn’t made the change provided what forcing mechanism is there in the constitution?

[VanShuyten]

Another reason, besides the huge debt, corruption and other crime, and drain on our economy, to cut them loose.

[JohnBovenmyer]

They’d have two possible status changes. They could become a state, but Congress would have to let them. It shouldn’t because we can’t afford them as is and can’t afford the added Rat voters. Or it could go independent if Congress would let them. It probably would if they demonstrated that they really wanted it. But they can’t afford to be without Uncle Sugar. So neither status change is viable. Realistically they are stuck with continuing to whine (the likely choice) or stop whining and start working until either of the former changes are viable for both parties.

[zeugma]

If you would like to read the oral arguments for yourself, see this link.

Argument transcripts can be found here.

[M Kehoe]

Good evening.

Interesting case.

Well, if babies born in Puerto Rico have U.S. citizenship, then that coveys to them the rights under the U.S. Constitution (what's left of it).

So, as a citizen of the U.S. or vise versa Puerto Rico, you can't be tried for the same crime twice in either jurisdiction. Otherwise, the Feds would have tried various mobsters in PR (or Guam), after losing their cases the first time in federal court.

Then again, I could be missing something For example, I thought both Kelo and 0bamacare rulings were a slam dunk.

5.56mm

[cll]

None. Nothing Constitutional. Just your plain ol’ judicial activism. At least some judges in the 1st Circuit of Appeals have started to hint as much.