Select Page

In case about government transparency, SCOTUS discusses Puerto Rico’s sovereignty

by | Jan 24, 2023 | Courts, Puerto Rico | 0 comments

Historically, US states have received “state sovereignty immunity,” which prevents a state from being sued in federal court without consent. However, on January 11, the Supreme Court of the United States deliberated on whether or not Puerto Rico’s oversight board receives this same immunity. They heard arguments delivered by Centro de Periodismo Investigativo (CPI), a Puerto Rican nonprofit news organization, and the Puerto Rico Financial Oversight and Management Board. As a journalism organization, CPI often covers PROMESA board activities and hopes to increase transparency in terms of board operations. When the oversight board refused to release certain documents, CPI took legal action. 

The proceeding court case focused on sovereign immunity, where the board attempted to escape charges by arguing that sovereign immunity prevented CPI from filing a lawsuit. In this specific case, the court ruled in favor of CPI, recognizing that the board was not entitled to sovereignty. Looking further than the case itself, it has brought up important questions about the distinction between states and territories in such immunity policies. Normally, sovereign immunity is about giving power to states when there are tensions between the federal and state governments. In order to gain this immunity, a territory would need the sovereignty of a US state, which Puerto Rico currently does not have. They are still controlled by Congress and receive different rights than states. 

The Biden Administration agreed with this sentiment, noting that Puerto Rico is not encompassed in the sovereign immunity policies due to its status as a territory. However, Justice Sonia Sotomayor disagreed, comparing the situation to Indian tribes. She asked why the situation with Puerto Rico was addressed differently than with Indian tribes that did end up getting sovereign immunity. She added that a wrong decision could set a harmful precedent and lead to many lawsuits. 

Ads

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Aditi Vikram

Aditi Vikram

Aditi Vikram is a sophomore at Greenhill School in Dallas, Texas. She participates in debate and she is also an active member of the secretariat leadership team of a Model United Nations organization. Aditi is passionate about research and journalism and hopes to learn more through her time at Pasquines. Additionally, she is a social media graphic designer, instrument advisor, and music tutor for a music nonprofit organization. She also writes articles for Law Insider, as the Chief Editor of Immigration Law. In her free time, she enjoys volunteering, playing the clarinet, reading sci-fi books, and listening to music. At Pasquines, Aditi is a Puerto Rico Affairs Intern Correspondent.

0 Comments

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.