岛屿案例重访:关岛、联邦医疗补助基金和宪法从属关系。

IF 0.6 4区 社会学 Q3 LAW
American Journal of Law & Medicine Pub Date : 2025-07-01 Epub Date: 2025-09-16 DOI:10.1017/amj.2025.10072
Dillon Kim
{"title":"岛屿案例重访:关岛、联邦医疗补助基金和宪法从属关系。","authors":"Dillon Kim","doi":"10.1017/amj.2025.10072","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The <i>Insular Cases</i>, a relic of imperial-era judicial reasoning, have long dictated the political and constitutional status of U.S. territories. In <i>United States v. Vaello-Madeo</i>, Justice Neil Gorsuch's concurring opinion signaled a critical moment for reevaluating these precedents. This Note examines the enduring consequences of the <i>Insular Cases</i>, focusing on the Pacific Island Territory of Guam as a case study. Specifically, it explores how Guam's political subordination-rooted in the judicial distinction between incorporated and unincorporated territories-has led to disparities in federal Medicaid funding. By analyzing the relationship between territorial representation in Congress and the structural inequities in health care funding, this Note argues that the constitutional instability caused by the <i>Insular Cases</i> presents a ripe opportunity for legal challenge. Justice Gorsuch's opinion opens a path for reconsidering the <i>Insular Cases</i>, with federal Medicaid funding serving as a compelling vehicle for addressing the broader constitutional and democratic deficiencies imposed on U.S. territories.</p>","PeriodicalId":7680,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Law & Medicine","volume":"51 2","pages":"376-391"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Insular Cases Revisited: Guam, Federal Medicaid Funding, and Constitutional Subordination.\",\"authors\":\"Dillon Kim\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/amj.2025.10072\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The <i>Insular Cases</i>, a relic of imperial-era judicial reasoning, have long dictated the political and constitutional status of U.S. territories. In <i>United States v. Vaello-Madeo</i>, Justice Neil Gorsuch's concurring opinion signaled a critical moment for reevaluating these precedents. This Note examines the enduring consequences of the <i>Insular Cases</i>, focusing on the Pacific Island Territory of Guam as a case study. Specifically, it explores how Guam's political subordination-rooted in the judicial distinction between incorporated and unincorporated territories-has led to disparities in federal Medicaid funding. By analyzing the relationship between territorial representation in Congress and the structural inequities in health care funding, this Note argues that the constitutional instability caused by the <i>Insular Cases</i> presents a ripe opportunity for legal challenge. Justice Gorsuch's opinion opens a path for reconsidering the <i>Insular Cases</i>, with federal Medicaid funding serving as a compelling vehicle for addressing the broader constitutional and democratic deficiencies imposed on U.S. territories.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7680,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American Journal of Law & Medicine\",\"volume\":\"51 2\",\"pages\":\"376-391\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American Journal of Law & Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/amj.2025.10072\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/9/16 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Law & Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/amj.2025.10072","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/9/16 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

岛屿案是帝国时代司法推理的遗留物,长期以来一直决定着美国领土的政治和宪法地位。在美国诉瓦埃罗-马多案中,大法官尼尔·戈萨奇(Neil Gorsuch)的一致意见标志着重新评估这些先例的关键时刻。本说明审查岛屿案件的持久后果,重点是关岛太平洋岛屿领土作为个案研究。具体来说,它探讨了关岛的政治从属关系——植根于合并领土和非合并领土之间的司法区别——如何导致联邦医疗补助资金的差异。通过分析国会属地代表权与医疗保健资金的结构性不平等之间的关系,本说明认为,由岛屿案件引起的宪法不稳定为法律挑战提供了成熟的机会。戈萨奇大法官的意见为重新考虑岛屿案件开辟了一条道路,联邦医疗补助资金将成为解决美国领土上更广泛的宪法和民主缺陷的有力工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Insular Cases Revisited: Guam, Federal Medicaid Funding, and Constitutional Subordination.

The Insular Cases, a relic of imperial-era judicial reasoning, have long dictated the political and constitutional status of U.S. territories. In United States v. Vaello-Madeo, Justice Neil Gorsuch's concurring opinion signaled a critical moment for reevaluating these precedents. This Note examines the enduring consequences of the Insular Cases, focusing on the Pacific Island Territory of Guam as a case study. Specifically, it explores how Guam's political subordination-rooted in the judicial distinction between incorporated and unincorporated territories-has led to disparities in federal Medicaid funding. By analyzing the relationship between territorial representation in Congress and the structural inequities in health care funding, this Note argues that the constitutional instability caused by the Insular Cases presents a ripe opportunity for legal challenge. Justice Gorsuch's opinion opens a path for reconsidering the Insular Cases, with federal Medicaid funding serving as a compelling vehicle for addressing the broader constitutional and democratic deficiencies imposed on U.S. territories.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
16.70%
发文量
8
期刊介绍: desde Enero 2004 Último Numero: Octubre 2008 AJLM will solicit blind comments from expert peer reviewers, including faculty members of our editorial board, as well as from other preeminent health law and public policy academics and professionals from across the country and around the world.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信