Discussion » Statements » Rosie's Corner » Do you think the rights of American citizens as stated in the Constitution should accrue to them no matter WHERE they live?
RosieG

Do you think the rights of American citizens as stated in the Constitution should accrue to them no matter WHERE they live?

Whether it is a state, territory, commonwealth, province what difference does LOCATION make if you are an American citizen? I don't get it.  If you do will you kindly explain the LOGIC of it?

Posted - October 2, 2017
Tags : None

Responses


  • 5354
    When you go to another country, you must live by the laws of that country. And you then have the rights (and duties) stated in those laws.
      October 2, 2017 5:58 AM MDT
    1

  • 113301
    My question was poorly stated JakobA. I am taling about the American citizens who live in Puerto Rico who have no representation  in the House or the Senate and cannot vote because they are not a "state". Thank you for your reply. I understand that when you move to a different country you must abide by their laws. "When in Rome do as the Romans do".  Apologies  for misdirection!
      October 4, 2017 3:57 AM MDT
    0

  • 13269
    Of course. Who is arguing otherwise?
      October 2, 2017 11:02 AM MDT
    0

  • 113301
     Puerto Ricans are AMERICAN CITIZENS. They have no representation in the House or the Senate and they cannot vote. They are not a "state". Does that answer your question?
      October 4, 2017 3:58 AM MDT
    0

  • 5354
    Apart from becoming "A State", could this be solved by Puerto Rico becoming a district in some existing state, like New Mexico or Texas. They would not need to move, there just would be on more district for the electoral college to play with.
      October 4, 2017 4:36 AM MDT
    1

  • 113301
    Huh. Never thought of that JakobA. I expect it could work though usually a district is "within" a state geographically but maybe it could. Thank you for your reply. Creative methinks and unique. For those reasons alone it might fail because god forbid people actually think when they try to solve problems rather than react robotically ! :)
      October 4, 2017 5:43 AM MDT
    0

  • 13269
    No, it doesn't. I was asking who is arguing that they are not US citizens. PR does not have Congressional representation because it is not a state by its own choice. Since it became a commonwealth in 1898, its people have voted five times against statehood, most recently in 2012. At that time, President Obama declined to force the issue because he said the matter should be decided by the people of Puerto Rico and not by the federal government.

    Why did you apparently not research this yourself and thus answer your own question? And why do you seem to believe that this is somehow President Trump's fault?
      October 4, 2017 5:37 AM MDT
    0

  • 11929
    According to the Constitution the STATES chose the electors of the President. An amendment was made to include the District of Columbia, but it does not extend to U.S. Territories. So, the LOGIC is that Puerto Rico IS given the rights accorded to them in the Constitution. I hope this clears it up for you. Also, Rosie, you may not know that the right to citizenship for Puerto Rico and other US territories is NOT in the Constitution. 


    This post was edited by Jane S at October 5, 2017 7:58 AM MDT
      October 4, 2017 7:36 PM MDT
    0