CAN'T WAIT TO SEE THE TRUMPIST HEADS EXPLODE:

A case about birthright citizenship for residents of American Samoa could prompt the U.S. Supreme Court to reconsider longstanding rulings Justice Neil Gorsuch blasted as resting "on a rotten foundation."

At issue are decisions known as the Insular Cases from the early 1900s that deprive Puerto Rico and other U.S. territories of full constitutional protections. Although the justices appear to no longer consider the decisions, which Gorsuch has previously said are based on "ugly racist stereotypes," good law, lower federal courts continue to rely on them when dealing with U.S. territories.

The justices ruled 8-1 on April 21 in United States v. Vaello Madero that the federal government could continue to exclude Puerto Rico from a Social Security benefit program. Gorsuch joined the opinion after noting no party asked the justices to overrule the Insular Cases. Now, in a petition filed Wednesday, individuals seeking citizenship in the American Samoa case explicitly ask the court to do just that.

The American Samoa case, Fitisemanu v. United States, "is exactly the opportunity the court needs to reconsider the doctrine and overrule it," said Columbia Law professor Christina Ponsa-Kraus. [...]

Gorsuch, who joined the court a year after it declined to hear the Tuaua case, has emerged as a potential ally, notably calling out what he sees as racist legacies affecting both American Indians and U.S. territories.

In an argument about tribal sovereignty on Wednesday, for example, Gorsuch admonished Oklahoma's counsel for seemingly giving short shrift to the state's acrimonious history with the tribes within its borders.

"Counsel, it's easy enough to say that standing at the podium in Washington, D.C.," Gorsuch said. "But the history and the reality should stare us all in the face."

It's the latest tribal case where Gorsuch could part ways from his five fellow conservatives by seeking to hold federal and state governments to their promises in what he sees as recompense for past behavior.

"Unlawful acts, performed long enough and with sufficient vigor, are never enough to amend the law," Gorsuch wrote for a 5-4 majority in an antecedent case about tribal sovereignty. "To hold otherwise would be to elevate the most brazen and longstanding injustices over the law, both rewarding wrong and failing those in the right."

Tweet   @brothersjudd