SCOTUS Rules 8 - 1 Against Puerto Rico Free Stuff

Meathead

Diamond Member
Jan 6, 2012
41,839
15,774
2,250
Prague, Czech Republic
SCOTUS ruled against a PR moocher 8 to 1. The dissenting justice was the dumbest of the group and none other than it's Puerto Rican, Sotomayor. She will be replaced as the dumbest in the next session as Brandon's token black woman takes her seat replacing Breyer.

 
U.S. Supreme Court declines to extend federal benefits to Puerto Rico
Congress can prevent people in the U.S. territory of Puerto Rico from participating in a federal program that provides benefits to low-income elderly, blind and disabled people, the Supreme Court ruled on Thursday.
This is a good thing. Territories are not states, and federal benefits shouldn't exist in the first place, per the 10th Amendment.
8 of 9 SCOTUS justices agreed, with the lone dissent being Sotomayor, the "wise latina" whose parents just happen to be from Puerto Rico.
What an embarrassment to the court these obama activist appointees have proven to be.
iu
 
U.S. Supreme Court declines to extend federal benefits to Puerto Rico

This is a good thing. Territories are not states, and federal benefits shouldn't exist in the first place, per the 10th Amendment.
8 of 9 SCOTUS justices agreed, with the lone dissent being Sotomayor, the "wise latina" whose parents just happen to be from Puerto Rico.
What an embarrassment to the court these obama activist appointees have proven to be.
iu

Do the people of PR have to pay Federal Taxes?
 
Damn, now the Puerto Rican women will be even more aggressive than before trying to find a sugar daddy to take them back to the states! :auiqs.jpg:
 
Brandon's token black woman takes her seat replacing Breyer.
That institution will be soiled by her presence and that is precisely what the Dems want to do to it. They are trying to destroy this nation, one tradition, one institution at a time. I've grown to actually hate that party and its true believers. They will continue to support the DC scum to spite Trump and his supporters even if it means the destruction of America.
 
I didn't ask you a question. Regardless, the implication that paying federal tax means you are owed federal welfare benefits is incorrect. Don't die on that hill.

I guess it would depend upon which Fed taxes you are paying.
 
Obviously 8 racists on the USSC. Man, that happened fast.
 
Last edited:
The answer is yes
An Den? An What? They are citizens of an unincorporated territory. As such, they are not qualified for statehood at this point. The population is aging and their industrial or economic base has never been very productive. They have or had 54 billion in debt and filed for bankruptcy a couple of years ago, the largest state to do that so far. They had nearly another 50 billion in unfunded obligations because like all Democrat/Leftist controlled governments, they govern based on giving citizens goodies in return for votes.

I have no animosity toward Puerto Ricans. The few I've met were fine folks. BUT, when a country has fewer than 3 million residents and half of them are dependent on government assistance to simply survive, tossing more cash at them isn't the answer. It's a black hole and until structural changes in their government are accomplished, private investment there is never going to improve and investment is the real key to helping that nation.

Oddly enough, the case that led to this current SCOTUS ruling is a situation where I'd side with the plaintiff. He was a U.S. citizen, living in the U.S. then moved back to PR. I don't understand why that should cause him to lose his SSI.
 

Forum List

Back
Top