Mr. Beat presents...
Supreme Court Briefs
Paris, France December 10, 1898
The United States and Spain sign the Treaty of Paris (no not that one,
not that one, not that one, yes that one) The one that ended the Spanish-American War. You may
remember the war as either a passing mention in your history class textbook or heard about future
American President Theodore Roosevelt's service during the war with the Rough Riders. But the
war is a lot more influential than many people realize. That’s because the Treaty of Paris saw
the loser, Spain, hand over its territories of the Philippines, Guam, and Puerto Rico to the victor,
the United States. Meanwhile, the United States had also, independently, took over Hawaii, using
the war as political cover. However, the United States government had no idea how to figure out
the political and legal implications of these people living in these shiny new territories.
While the United States was experienced in dealing with new territory throughout its history
of purchase and uh...conquest, controlling the far-away islands of Puerto Rico and
the Philippines were going to be a lot harder than deciding the fate of, say,
Kansas and Nebraska. For one, Puerto Rico and the Philippines were colonies, not soon-to-be-states.
All the United States government really had to go off of was Article 9 of the Treaty of Paris,
which said that #1: “The civil rights and political status of the native inhabitants
of the territories hereby ceded to the United States shall be determined by Congress.” And #2:
the little known part about the Dred Scott decision that said that, besides getting
new states, there’s no Constitutionally-given power the U.S. can use to maintain colonies.
But that wasn’t going to stop the William McKinley administration
and his buddies in Congress from going about it their way.
In 1900, the Foraker Act set up a government in Puerto Rico with specific Puerto Rican citizenship
for the island’s inhabitants. Now, this was not to be with, ya know...United States citizenship. Oh,
and the law also had numerous caveats relating to matters of tariffs on imported Puerto Rican goods,
which would come up again and again in the most famous (or infamous) of the Insular Cases.
Hold on Mr. Beat, what exactly are the Insular Cases? Well, it’s what this video is about you
silly squirrel. You see, this episode of Supreme Court Briefs is a bit different. Because it wasn’t
clear how the United States should handle the new territories, there were A LOT of individual cases
that attempted to make the answer to this question a bit more clear. While historians
have labelled at least 16 different cases as part of the “Insular Cases,” to keep it simple,
I’m going to talk about the ones that left the biggest impact. Oh, and all of the ones
I picked have to deal with Puerto Rico. Side note: In case you're wondering, the
word “insular,” in “Insular Cases” comes from how the island territories were under the day-to-day
control of the Bureau of Insular Affairs. Alright, let’s go in chronological order then.
Insular Case #1 In 1899, the DeLima Sugar Importing Company
wanted to get back what they paid in tariffs on Puerto Rican sugar they imported to New York.
They sued the Collector of the Port of New York, George Bidwell, reasoning that because Puerto Rico
was a part of the United States, New York couldn’t slap tariffs on imported stuff from Puerto Rico.
An appeals court ruled in favor of DeLima, stating that for tax purposes, Puerto Rico was a U.S.
territory and not a foreign country. In addition, it said Congress didn’t have to write a whole new
law to work out tariff laws for Puerto Rican trade, so DeLima Sugar COULD get their money
back. New York appealed and the Supreme Court heard oral arguments from January 8-11, 1901.
In a case now known as DeLima v. Bidwell, the Court announced on May 27, 1901 that it sided
with DeLima, agreeing with the appeals court in a 5-4 decision. In the majority opinion, Justice
Henry Billings Brown wrote that regarding tariff laws, Puerto Rico was not a foreign country, so
tariffs were not required under the law. Because there was no law from Congress deciding the exact
status of Puerto Rico for tax purposes, the U.S. couldn’t get away with issuing tariff
rules on Puerto Rico for domestic consumption by saying that Puerto Rico is a foreign country.
Insular Case #2 Hey, it’s our friend George Bidwell again!
As it turns out, Bidwell’s name was on ANOTHER case DECIDED ON THE EXACT SAME DAY,
May 27, 1901. A dude named Samuel Downes of the S. B. Downes & Company was in a similar situation as
the DeLima Sugar Importing Company, as he had to pay New York tariffs on oranges from Puerto Rico.
Downes said that the Foraker Act (hey remember that?) still allowed for a special temporary
tariff on imports for Puerto Rico, which was unconstitutional because Article I, Section
8 of the Constitution says that "all duties, imposts, and excises shall be uniform throughout
the United States.” Puerto Rico couldn’t be the only part of the United States with tariffs like
those on their oranges since all states have to have the same tariff laws on domestic trade.
The Supreme Court heard oral arguments for this case, known as Downes v. Bidwell, at the same time
as they did for DeLima v. Bidwell. However, for THIS case, the Court sided with Bidwell. It was
5-4. Although the Court said that Puerto Rico was not a foreign country for tax purposes, the island
was not fully a part of the United States. However, certain Constitutional protections
were guaranteed for inhabitants of the island territory. Only when Congress “incorporates”
a territory, could the people living there get ALL the protections under the Constitution. It’s
important to note that “territorial incorporation” doesn’t mean an actual legal process Congress uses
to suddenly make Puerto Rico or Guam a full part of the country, it’s basically a general
agreement that certain United States territories are more connected to the country than others.
Justice John M. Harlan wrote a dissent,
arguing that incorporation was too abstract and that Congress should give Puerto Rico residents
full rights. He added that Congress was restricted to following what was in the Constitution.
Incorporation made it so that Puerto Ricans didn’t live within the jurisdiction of the Constitution,
which was a problem because Congress can only do things according to what the Constitution says.
This is where the question “does the Constitution follow the flag?”
comes from. Does the Constitution apply to everywhere the American government has control
over? According to the Supreme Court, the answer is, uh...meh...not really. If a territory like
Hawaii at that time was incorporated, that meant that Hawaiians got full protections
under the Constitution. But for territories like Puerto Rico and the Philippines,
which were unincorporated, they did NOT have all the Constitutional protections.
Insular Case #3 Now hold up, if Puerto Rico
isn’t a foreign country, but it’s not fully covered by the Constitution, what kind of
rights do the actual residents of the island have? Well, the Court attempted to answer that question
in yet another Insular Case. It all started with a young woman named Isabel González, a native Puerto
Rican, who went to New York City from Puerto Rico in 1902 in order to be with her fiancé.
To her surprise, federal authorities labeled her as an “alien immigrant” who would be a “public
discharge,” meaning she couldn’t come into New York as a citizen or United States resident,
and she could be turned away if she was determined to be a burden on the public welfare system.
Given that she was pregnant and unmarried at the time, this might be a real possibility.
After being detained, González appealed to the local board, which ruled against her. Oh,
and representing the other side was the federal commissioner of immigration for the Port of New
York, William Williams. That’s his actual name. González then petitioned the United States Circuit
Court for the Southern District of New York, who upheld the board’s decision. When González took
the case to the Supreme Court, Federico Degetau, the first Resident Commissioner of Puerto Rico
in the House of Representatives (basically a representative with no voting power), and Frederic
René Coudert, Jr, who was on the anti-tariff side of Downes v. Bidwell, joined forces with her.
On January 4, 1904, the Supreme Court announced that it sided with...um...both?
This case, known as González v. Williams, was unanimous. Basically the Court said that
González was not an alien nor a United States citizen. She, along with other Puerto Ricans,
could enter the country as “noncitizen nationals,” which was basically
a status somewhere in between being a full citizen and not a citizen at all.
In case you were wondering, González herself was already a United States citizen by that point,
because she had married her fiancé and become a citizen through marriage.
Puerto Ricans would eventually gain citizenship
as part of the Jones Act of Puerto Rico , signed by President Woodrow Wilson in 1917.
However, this did not give Puerto Ricans full rights as United States citizens.
Insular Case #4 Ok, so we’re jumping
ahead a few years now. This one began when Puerto Rican newspaper editor
Jesús M. Balzac The Puerto Rican government wasn’t happy that Balzac wrote a negative
article that indirectly mentioned Puerto Rican colonial governor Arthur Yager. You see,
even though Puerto Ricans had United States citizenship, Balzac didn’t get a jury trial,
which is part of the Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution! So without a jury,
the District Court of Puerto Rico found him guilty. In 1920, Balzac’s appeal was rejected
by the Puerto Rican Supreme Court, which cited earlier cases to say that regardless of the Jones
Act that guaranteed citizenship, parts of the Bill of Rights still did not apply to Puerto Ricans.
The Supreme Court heard oral arguments on March 20, 1922, and announced its decision on April
10. This one was unanimous. It sided with Puerto Rico. In a case known as Balzac v. Porto Rico,
Chief Justice William Howard Taft’s opinion stated that since Puerto Rico was not incorporated into
America (which by now meant that it was not designated as ready for statehood)
Congress had free rein in deciding how the Constitution applies to Puerto Ricans.
It did not matter that Puerto Ricans were U.S. citizens since they previously lived
under Spanish law; they would not be ready for the American court system of trial by
jury. According to Taft, territories like Puerto Rico and the Philippines “should be permitted
themselves to determine how far they wish to adopt this institution of Anglo-Saxon origin,
and when.” Ugh, ok then. So that was a big setback for Puerto Ricans wanting to expand their rights.
And while we’ve been talking about Puerto Rico-specific cases, they all represent
a larger point of the Insular Cases. Today, most American territories and
their citizens remain in this weird limbo where they are fully a part of the United States for
some things like taxes and citizenship, but they can’t take advantage of everything that
comes with being a part of the Union, like full representation in Congress.
While Puerto Ricans do now have rights in court, they still can’t vote in presidential elections
or have voting members in Congress. The island has been discussed as a possible 51st state,
but not all Puerto Ricans are fully on board with that idea. And, just like with
the possible statehood of Washington, D.C., today it’s a highly contentious
issue in Congress. Puerto Rico today remains an unincorporated territory of the United States
As for the other American territories gained during the Spanish-American War?
The Philippines won its independence in 1935 after years of persecution and violence.
Hawaii became the 50th state in 1959.
Like Puerto Rico, Guam, the North Mariana Islands, and the U.S. Virgin Islands remain
unincorporated United States territories. Many today
argue that the Insular Cases justified racism, as well as gave the green light to American
imperialism which went on to make a mess in Latin America and around the world.
I’ll see you for the next Supreme Court case, jury!
so what should happen with puerto rico should it become the 51st state
should puerto ricans get full representation under the constitution or not you know personally i
think that puerto rico should become a state and they should get full representation but
you may disagree let me know in the comments below you know it's okay to disagree with me
and also while we're at it what other important insular cases should i have brought up for this
episode now helping me narrow them down from 16 to 4 was jacob friedman who basically did most of the
research wrote most of the script for this episode was a tremendous help and you should check out his
political podcast which is called gen zier's talk politics i put a link to it in the description of
this video and finally here's my monthly shout out to all my patreon supporters who donate at least
10 bucks or more each month to my channel i'm going to read them off alphabetically this time
starting with the george washington level alicia solberg andrew b austin c rose
brady bardwell dr paul j lilly matt standish nick everett sean connect and will scruggs
at the grover cleveland level andrew snyder brian leighton grant hughes elon capone jack
l jack richardson jacob birnbaum jar jar binks 420 joel serrano lozada john johnson justin
holtz kit walker lee 48 nader aide robert reichel samuel strizz southside mitch thomas oppenheim
thomas victor martinez werner 69 and zachary f parker and at the calvin coolidge level
adam christians c bedroom david seagal gail gerard laughlin mcgregor raquel jones sally thompson
stephen scott and the geo scholar thanks to all my patreon supporters and thank you for watching