Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: cll

I would swear that we had this exact same conversation almost a year ago to the date. How often does the subject of the status vote come up? It can't be every year.


12 posted on 12/22/2005 4:26:50 PM PST by roamincadillac (Still waitin' for all the pinkos to leave our country.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]


To: roamincadillac

"How often does the subject of the status vote come up? It can't be every year."

This is a perennial problem and it will not go away until the Congress of the U.S.A. lives up to their responsibility under the Treaty of Paris of 1898.

As the wise Justice Harlan stated too long ago:

"In my opinion, Congress has no existence and can exercise no authority outside of the Constitution. Still less is it true that Congress can deal with new territories just as other nations have done or may do with their new territories. This nation is under the control of a written constitution, the supreme law of the land and the only source of the powers which our government, or any branch or officer of it, may exert at any time or at any place. Monarchical and despotic governments, unrestrained by written constitutions, may do with newly acquired territories what this government may not do consistently with our fundamental law. To say otherwise is to concede that Congress may, by action taken outside of the Constitution, engraft upon our republican institutions a colonial system such as exists under monarchical governments. Surely such a result was never contemplated by the fathers of the Constitution. If that instrument had contained a word suggesting the possibility of a result of that character it would never have been adopted by the people of the United States. The idea that this country may acquire territories anywhere upon the earth, by conquest or treaty, and hold them as mere colonies or provinces,—the people inhabiting them to enjoy only such rights as Congress chooses to accord to them,—is wholly inconsistent with the spirit and genius, as well as with the words, of the Constitution." - Justice John Harlan, dissenting in the Insular Cases, 1901


16 posted on 12/22/2005 4:39:44 PM PST by cll (San Juan, PR, USA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson