Table of Contents Table of Contents
Previous Page  9 / 24 Next Page
Show Menu
Previous Page 9 / 24 Next Page
Page Background


la tormenta perfecta del 9 de junio:

sánchez valle, promesa y la quiebra criolla

Bd. of Engineers, Architects and Surveyors


Flores de Otero


426 U. S. 572, 597 (1976);… (“[T]he purpose of Congress

in the 1950 and 1952 legislation was to accord to Puerto

Rico the degree of autonomy and independence normally

associated with States of the Union”);




Democratic Party

, 457 U. S. 1, 8 (1982) (“Puerto Rico, like

a state, is an autonomous political entity, sovereign over

matters not ruled by the [Federal] Constitution” (internal

quotation marks omitted)). That newfound authority,

including over local criminal laws, brought mutual

benefit to the Puerto Rican people and the entire United

States. And if our double jeopardy decisions hinged on

measuring an entity’s self-governance, the emergence of

the Commonwealth would have resulted as well in the

capacity to bring the kind of successive prosecutions

attempted here.”


Sin embargo, en el contexto de lo sucedido ese día, estos

aspectos de la opinión se ahogaron en el estruendo de los

resultados y el contexto de los otros sucesos.

Amplía el Tribunal por voz de la juez Kagan:

“All that separates our view from petitioners is

what that congressional recognition means for Puerto

Rico’s ability to bring successive prosecutions. We agree

that Congress has broad latitude to develop innovative

approaches to territorial governance, see U. S. Const.,

Art. IV, §3, cl. 2; that Congress may thus enable a

territory’s people to make large-scale choices about

their own political institutions; and that Congress did

exactly that in enacting Public Law 600 and approving

the Puerto Rico Constitution –prime examples of what

Felix Frankfurter once termed ‘inventive statesmanship’

respecting the island. Memorandum for the Secretary of

War, in Hearings on S. 4604 before the Senate Committee

on Pacific Islands and Porto Rico, 63d Cong., 2d Sess., 22

(1914); see Reply Brief 18-20. But one power Congress

7 Id. Pp. 13-14.