Democracy before the Federal Court

By: Jorge Iván Rodríguez Feliciano, M.B.A.

In a democratic system, the right to vote is what provides legitimacy to the government officials elected by the people. It is contrary to democracy that the right to vote be denied to those people legal residents of the nation of which they are citizens. Racism and fear of what those who acquire the right to vote may achieve are undeniable elements in the lack of reasons for the denial of this right of democracy. Those of us, who love this country with a genuine desire to give it the best, will not accept the dishonor of our people or injustice. Democratic rights must be equal for all.

In 1950, with the approval of the “U. S. Nationality Act”, it was approved retroactively to 1941 that all Puertorricans will be considered American citizens by place of birth. In 1820, judge John Harland, from the Federal Supreme Court, made a decision approved by the unanimous opinion of the judges in the case Loughborough vs. Blake. In such decision it was established unanimously that the United States means the states, the territories, and all foot of land over which the American flag floats. The court expressed that the District of Columbia, which is a territory of the United States, is not less part of the United States than the state of Maryland. Being Puerto Rico a United States territory since 1898, whose residents are American citizens by birth, the most natural act should be that they be able to vote for the president and vice-president of the nation. Over 250,000 Puertorrican soldiers have answered the calling of the president to go to the war as part of the fight for liberty, human rights, and democracy. If our chest is good enough to stop bullets of the enemies of our American nation, they should also be good enough for the enjoyment of life and the pursuit of happiness.

In 1965, President Lyndon B. Johnson pronounced a speech to Congress in favor of the right to vote for the fellow citizens of the black race. In the mentioned speech, the president said the following: “The essence of our American tradition of state and local governments is the belief expressed by Thomas Jefferson that government is best when it is more close to the people. Yet that belief is betrayed by those State and local officials who engage in denying the right of citizens to vote. Their actions serve only to assure that their States’ governments and local governments shall be remote from the people’s will and least responsive to the people’s wishes. If there were no other reasons, the strengthening and protection of the vital role of State and local governments would be reasons enough to act against t he denial of the right to vote for any of our citizens. In our system, the first right and most vital of all our rights is the right to vote. Jefferson described the elective franchise as “the ark of our safety”. It is from the exercise of this right that the guarantee of all our rights flows. Unless the right to vote be secure and subject to denial, all other rights are insecure and subject to denial for all our citizens. The challenge to this right is a challenge to America itself. We must meet this challenge as decisively as we would meet a challenge mounted against our land from enemies abroad. In the world, America stands for and works for the right of all men to govern themselves through free, uninhibited elections. An ink bottle broken against an American Embassy, a fire set in an American library, an insult committed against our American flag, anywhere in the world, does far less injury to our country and our cause than the discriminatory denial of the right to vote …”.


Lyndon B. Johnson was the president that approved the law that gave equal power to the Federal Court in the District of Puerto Rico in relation to the federal courts of the rest of the states. The principle of justice and equality that make possible that the Federal Court for the District of Puerto Rico achieve the same power than the court of others States of the union is the principle that call for the order of that federal court to honor democracy and the voting right to the Americans of Puerto Rico. There is no reason for any American to have more human and civil rights that another. There is also no reason for any court to impose inferiority and inequality of rights to the American citizens of Puerto Rico. The federal courts are constitutionally obligated to protect the principle of equal protection of law for all American citizens. Injustice and the disrespect of democracy must not be approved by any judge. We have gone to the federal court to claim our right for the presidential vote because it is in court where justice and the right of American citizens for democracy should be honored.

The Federal court has a lawsuit presented by our lawyer, Gregorio Igartúa, in which we claim the right to vote for the President of the United States of America. The President is the officer that approves the Federal laws for all those American citizens to obey. An American citizen that violates a law signed by the President is exposed to being prosecuted in the Federal Court by the General Attorney.

The law that provides equal standing to the Federal court in Puerto Rico to those Federal courts in the states of the Union was signed by President Lyndon B. Johnson. This was done without amending the Federal Constitution. Equally, the Federal court determined the application in Puerto Rico of the commercial clause of the Federal Constitution without amending the Constitution to specifically establish that the clause would be applicable to the territory of Puerto Rico. We are seeking justice and the order to activate the mechanism so the right to vote for the president can be exercised by all. We trust the sense of justice of the judge who is handling our claim will ease the pencil of democracy.

In his memorable speech in Washington, D.C. in 1963, Martin Luther King expressed: “More than one hundred years ago, a great American, in whose symbolic shadow we stand signed the Emancipation Proclamation. One hundred years later, the life of the Negro is still sadly crippled by the manacles of segregation and the chains of discrimination. One hundred years later, the Negro is still languishing in the corners of American society and finds himself an exile in his own land. When the architects of our republic wrote the magnificent words of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, they were signing a promissory note to which every American was to fall heir. This note was a promise that all men would be guaranteed the inalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. But we refuse to believe that the bank of justice is bankrupt. We refuse to believe that there are insufficient funds in the great vaults of opportunity of this nation. So we have come to cash this check, a check that will give us upon demand the riches of freedom and the security of justice. We have also come to this hallowed spot to remind America of the fierce urgency of now. This is no time to engage in the luxury of cooling off or to take the tranquilizing drug of gradualism. I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: "We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal." I have a dream that my four children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character…When we let freedom ring, when we let it ring from every village and every hamlet, from every state and every city, we will be able to speed up that day when all of God's children, black men and white men, Jews and Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics, will be able to join hands and sing in the words of the old Negro spiritual, "Free at last! Free at last! Thank God Almighty…"

Nobody can deny the similarity that exists between Martin Luther King’s accusations about discrimination compared to the denial of the right to the presidential vote for the American citizens of Puerto Rico. The same as Martin Luther King, we refuse to believe that the bank of justice be bankrupt. Hence, after 105 years of deficient democracy, we have gone to court to seek justice and a remedy that will honor our fundamental right to vote.

Those who live happy with the idea of having another American deciding for them have the right of not voting on Election Day, but they do not have the right to deny the power of vote to their fellow citizens who wish to participate in democracy. No Puertorrican should teach their children to live under the conformity that another American be the one who makes important decisions of our nation without our vote being taken in consideration.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, document of which our nation is signatory, establishes in Article XXI section 3 that: “The will of the people must be the base of authority of government, that will should be expressed in genuine and periodical elections of which must be taken in effect though universal suffrage, equally secret.” The Federal Constitution establishes in Article VI that the international treaties in which the nation is signatory will be supreme law of the country. Regarding the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the United States did not exclude Puerto Rico when they signed th e aforementioned international treaty. For this reason, they are obligated by the Federal Constitution to comply with this treaty in Puerto Rico. We are waiting the order of the Court to give freedom to the right to vote and democracy in Puerto Rico. The times of segregation, discrimination, and the violation of human rights must end. (The author is President of Puertorriqueños Pro Unión Permanente, Inc e-mail: federalstar51@usa.com.)