A first-of-its-kind resource studying the operation of constitutional law across the entire Caribbean, embracing the linguistic, political, and cultural diversity of the region, Each jurisdictional chapter shares a common format and structure to aid comparison between different jurisdictions, Contributors from a variety of different disciplines-law, history, and political science-provide a range of perspectives on the study of the region's constitutions Book jacket.
Tells the tragic story of Puerto Ricans who sought the post-Civil War regime of citizenship, rights, and statehood but instead received racist imperial governance.
In this groundbreaking study of American imperialism, leading legal scholars address the problem of the U.S. territories. Foreign in a Domestic Sense will redefine the boundaries of constitutional scholarship. More than four million U.S. citizens currently live in five “unincorporated” U.S. territories. The inhabitants of these vestiges of an American empire are denied full representation in Congress and cannot vote in presidential elections. Focusing on Puerto Rico, the largest and most populous of the territories, Foreign in a Domestic Sense sheds much-needed light on the United States’ unfinished colonial experiment and its legacy of racially rooted imperialism, while insisting on the centrality of these “marginal” regions in any serious treatment of American constitutional history. For one hundred years, Puerto Ricans have struggled to define their place in a nation that neither wants them nor wants to let them go. They are caught in a debate too politicized to yield meaningful answers. Meanwhile, doubts concerning the constitutionality of keeping colonies have languished on the margins of mainstream scholarship, overlooked by scholars outside the island and ignored by the nation at large. This book does more than simply fill a glaring omission in the study of race, cultural identity, and the Constitution; it also makes a crucial contribution to the study of American federalism, serves as a foundation for substantive debate on Puerto Rico’s status, and meets an urgent need for dialogue on territorial status between the mainlandd and the territories. Contributors. José Julián Álvarez González, Roberto Aponte Toro, Christina Duffy Burnett, José A. Cabranes, Sanford Levinson, Burke Marshall, Gerald L. Neuman, Angel R. Oquendo, Juan Perea, Efrén Rivera Ramos, Rogers M. Smith, E. Robert Statham Jr., Brook Thomas, Richard Thornburgh, Juan R. Torruella, José Trías Monge, Mark Tushnet, Mark Weiner
Borderline Citizens explores the intersection of U.S. colonial power and Puerto Rican migration. Robert C. McGreevey examines a series of confrontations in the early decades of the twentieth century between colonial migrants seeking work and citizenship in the metropole and various groups—employers, colonial officials, court officers, and labor leaders—policing the borders of the U.S. economy and polity. Borderline Citizens deftly shows the dynamic and contested meaning of American citizenship. At a time when colonial officials sought to limit citizenship through the definition of Puerto Rico as a U.S. territory, Puerto Ricans tested the boundaries of colonial law when they migrated to California, Arizona, New York, and other states on the mainland. The conflicts and legal challenges created when Puerto Ricans migrated to the U.S. mainland thus serve, McGreevey argues, as essential, if overlooked, evidence crucial to understanding U.S. empire and citizenship. McGreevey demonstrates the value of an imperial approach to the history of migration. Drawing attention to the legal claims migrants made on the mainland, he highlights the agency of Puerto Rican migrants and the efficacy of their efforts to find an economic, political, and legal home in the United States. At the same time, Borderline Citizens demonstrates how colonial institutions shaped migration streams through a series of changing colonial legal categories that tracked alongside corporate and government demands for labor mobility. McGreevey describes a history shaped as much by the force of U.S. power overseas as by the claims of colonial migrants within the United States.
Over a century ago the United States Supreme Court decided the “Insular Cases,” which limited the applicability of constitutional rights in Puerto Rico and other overseas territories. Essays in Reconsidering the Insular Cases examine the history and legacy of these cases and explore possible solutions for the dilemmas they created.
Focuses on America's first attempts at empire-building through a string of U.S. Supreme Court decisions in the early part of the 20th century that tried to define the legal and constitutional status of America's island territories: Puerto Rico, Cuba, and the Philippines, among others, and reveals how the Court provided the rationalization for the establishment of an American empire.
The only book of its kind in the English language, this is the first volume of the Oxford Commentaries on the State Constitutions of the United States to explore the constitution of a U.S. territory: Puerto Rico. The first half of the volume unearths the island's constitutional history from the days of Spanish colonization in the 16th century, through to Congress' enactment in 2016 of the Puerto Rico Oversight, Management and Economic Stability Act (PROMESA). Professor Cox Alomar offers a careful analysis of the most recent decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court implicating Puerto Rico, Sánchez Valle (2016), Franklin Trust (2016), Aurelius (2020) and Vaello Madero (2022). The second half of this volume provides an in-depth analysis of each of the provisions incorporated by the Puerto Rican framers to the 1952 Constitution, still in full force today. Commentary is provided on each of these constitutional provisions in light of the most recent decisions of the Puerto Rico Supreme Court. The volume examines the interaction between the Puerto Rico Supreme Court and the U.S. Supreme Court, as well as the complex relationship between Puerto Rico and the political branches in Washington. This book is a timely companion in one of the more complex, yet transformative periods in Puerto Rico's constitutional life.
In a set of cases decided at the end of the nineteenth century, the Supreme Court declared that Congress had "plenary power" to regulate immigration, Indian tribes, and newly acquired territories. Not coincidentally, the groups subject to Congress' plenary power were primarily nonwhite and generally perceived as "uncivilized." The Court left Congress free to craft policies of assimilation, exclusion, paternalism, and domination. Despite dramatic shifts in constitutional law in the twentieth century, the plenary power case decisions remain largely the controlling law. The Warren Court, widely recognized for its dedication to individual rights, focused on ensuring "full and equal citizenship"--an agenda that utterly neglected immigrants, tribes, and residents of the territories. The Rehnquist Court has appropriated the Warren Court's rhetoric of citizenship, but has used it to strike down policies that support diversity and the sovereignty of Indian tribes. Attuned to the demands of a new century, the author argues for abandonment of the plenary power cases, and for more flexible conceptions of sovereignty and citizenship. The federal government ought to negotiate compacts with Indian tribes and the territories that affirm more durable forms of self-government. Citizenship should be "decentered," understood as a commitment to an intergenerational national project, not a basis for denying rights to immigrants.
