Equal rights to 3.6 million residents of overseas U.S. territories will not be affected by the Supreme Court's decision.
The court's early 20th-century precedents that enabled the country's colonial expansion were the subject of a petition by three American Samoans living in Utah.
John Fitisemanu said that the ruling that he was not equal to other Americans because he was born in a U.S. territory was a punch in the gut. I was born in the U.S. and have a U.S. passport. I am not a United States citizen because of a federal law.
Fitisemanu was denied equal rights as a citizen in the Insular Cases. The people of the overseas territories the U.S. conquered in the Spanish-American War came from "savage tribes" and "aliens", according to the cases. The court created a new class of unincorporated territory for the Spanish possessions that denied them equal rights.
The U.S. overseas territories of American Samoan, Guam, Northern Marianas Islands, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands are still governed by the Insular Cases. Congress negotiates different rules for people's access to their rights in different territories.
American Samoans are not US citizens, but American nationals. If they move to the District of Columbia, they won't be able to vote. One of the main complaints made by Fitisemanu was this.
There are only two justices who support reversing the Insular Cases. The Washington Post's photo was taken by Jabin Botsford.
Fitisemanu argued that the 14th Amendment grants U.S. citizenship to anyone born or naturalized in the U.S. The residents of the territories should be given full access to their citizenship as they are both part of the U.S.
Territorial residents have been trying to overturn the Insular Cases through the courts for a long time. The courts have not done so in each case.
After the Vaello-Madero case, it was thought that the Supreme Court might act differently on Fitisemanu.
It's time to acknowledge the seriousness of the error and admit that the Insular Cases have no foundation in the Constitution. They shouldn't be in our law.
In her Vaello-Madero dissent, she said that the Insular Cases were both odious and wrong.
Four of the Supreme Court justices have to vote on the case. There weren't enough votes to take up Fitisemanu. There was no dissent from the case.
The article was first published on HuffPost.
All Rights Reserved © 2024
