Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Puerto Rico votes for statehood but Congress looks unlikely to agree

Flags of Unites States and Puerto Rico
Christian Thiel/EyeEm/Getty Images

A narrow majority of Puerto Ricans have voted once again to seek statehood, but their wish is hardly guaranteed to come true in the foreseeable future.

It will be up to Congress and the president to follow through and negotiate the terms of a switch for the island, which has essentially become the world's oldest colony during a dozen decades as a second-class territory of the United States. Proponents say changing that would erase a big blemish on the global reputation of American democracy.

Because the Senate looks increasingly likely to remain under Republcian control, though, prospects for a statehood bill next year look very dim no matter who is president. President Trump is no fan of the idea, believing it would mean more Democrats in Congress. And former Vice President Joe Biden would lack sufficient Democratic support on Capitol Hill to push through statehood for either Puerto Rico or much bluer Washington, D.C.


Tuesday's referendum secured the "yes" votes of 52 percent in nearly complete returns, a victory margin of about 50,000 votes. The island has voted for statehood twice before in the past decade, but neither plebiscite prompted congressional action.

Statehood supporters came to believe something would be different this time, on the assumption of a lopsided Biden win and a decisive Democratic sweep of Congress — neither of which materialized.

Legislation would be required to end the commonwealth arrangement of the past 70 years: Puerto Ricans are American citizens who are mainly exempt from federal income taxes, although they must pay Social Security and Medicare taxes. The island has significant autonomy, but in return it gets much less federal aid than the states and has no electoral votes or voting members of Congress.

With a population of 3.2 million, Puerto Rico would rank 31st in population among states, and like half a dozen others would elect four House members and a pair of senators. At least at the outset, its complex political alignments would mean it looks relatively purple. But at a minimum it could be counted on to send more non-white lawmakers to Washington.


Read More

Trump’s Anti-Latino Racism is a Major Liability for Democracy

Close-up of sign reading 'Immigrants Make America Great' at a Baltimore rally.

Trump’s Anti-Latino Racism is a Major Liability for Democracy

Donald Trump’s second administration has fully clarified Latinos’ racial position in America: our ethnic group’s labor, culture, and aspirations are too much for his supporters to stomach. The Latino presence in America triggers too many uneasy questions (are they White?), too many doubts (are they really American?), and too much resentment (why are they doing better than me?).

Trump’s targeted deportations of undocumented Latinos, unwarranted arrests of Latino citizens, and heightened ICE presence in Latino neighborhoods address these worries by lumping Latinos with Black people. Simply put, we have become yet another visible population that America socially stigmatizes, economically exploits, and politically terrorizes because aggrieved White adults want to preserve their rank as our nation’s premier racial group. The cumulative impacts are serious: just yesterday, an international panel of investigators on human rights and racism, backed by the U.N., found that such actions have resulted in “grave human rights violations.”

Keep ReadingShow less
Just the Facts: The SAVE Act and the Future of Voter ID Rules
A close up of a window with a sticker on it
Photo by Zach Wear on Unsplash

Just the Facts: The SAVE Act and the Future of Voter ID Rules

Last week, I wrote a column in the Fulcrum entitled “Just the Facts: Voter ID, States’ Powers, and Federal Limits.” The facts presented in that writing made it clear that the U.S. Constitution does not require voter ID and left almost all election administration—including voter qualifications—to the states. However, over time, constitutional amendments and federal statutes have restricted states’ ability to impose discriminatory voting rules, but they have never mandated voter ID.

The SAVE America Act

The national debate over voter ID has entered a new phase with the introduction of the SAVE America Act, the most sweeping federal voter‑identification and citizenship‑documentation proposal in modern history. For more than two centuries, voter eligibility rules—ID included—have been primarily a matter of state authority, bounded by constitutional protections against discrimination. The SAVE America Act would shift that balance by imposing federal requirements for both photo identification and documentary proof of citizenship in federal elections.

Keep ReadingShow less
Posters are displayed next to Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) as he speaks at a news conference to unveil the Take It Down Act to protect victims against non-consensual intimate image abuse, on Capitol Hill on June 18, 2024 in Washington, DC.

A lawsuit against xAI over AI-generated deepfakes targeting teenage girls exposes a growing crisis in schools. As laws struggle to keep up, this story explores AI accountability, teen safety, and what educators and parents must do now.

Getty Images, Andrew Harnik

Deepfakes: The New Face of Cyberbullying and Why Parents, Schools, and Lawmakers Must Act

As a former teacher who worked in a high school when Snapchat was born, I witnessed the birth of sexting and its impact on teens. I recall asking a parent whether he was checking his daughter’s phone for inappropriate messages. His response was, “sometimes you just don’t want to know.” But the federal lawsuit filed last week against Elon Musk's xAI has put a national spotlight on AI-generated deepfakes and the teenage girls they target. Parents and teachers can’t ignore the crisis inside our schools.

AI Companies Built the Tool. The Grok Lawsuit Says They Own the Damage.

Whether the theory of French prosecutors–that Elon Musk deliberately allowed the sexualized image controversy to grow so that it would drive up activity on the platform and boost the company’s valuation–is true or not, when a company makes the decision to build a tool and knows that it can be weaponized but chooses to release it anyway, they are making a risk-based decision believing that they can act without consequence. The Grok lawsuit could make these types of business decisions much more costly.

Keep ReadingShow less