PR statehood, just a simple WH/House/Senate vote?

[MillennialModerate]

I know DC statehood is unlikely due to the constitution.

But is Puerto Rico statehood as simple as all 3 bodies (WH, SEN, HOR) passing it in a majority up or down vote?

And if so do you think any Dems would vote no?

[brucejoel99]

Yes & no, respectively.

[Former President tack50]

If PR votes strongly enough and with enough turnout this November, PR statehood actually has a strong chance of being bipartisan in fact.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Actually, the President has no voice in whether Statehood is granted. Admission is an Article IV power over which the President has no veto, not an Article I power. The reason why Statehood has usually been accomplished by passing an Article I bill is that there are usually some ancillary issues that need to be resolved as well. Without such a bill, Puerto Rico would only have 1 Representative and two Senators until reappointment after the 2030 census, and some of the special legislation relevant to the current Commonwealth and not to a State would remain in effect.  So a President opposed to Puerto Rican Statehood could make things messy, but he couldn't stop it.

[GMantis]

Actually, the President has no voice in whether Statehood is granted. Admission is an Article IV power over which the President has no veto, not an Article I power. The reason why Statehood has usually been accomplished by passing an Article I bill is that there are usually some ancillary issues that need to be resolved as well. Without such a bill, Puerto Rico would only have 1 Representative and two Senators until reappointment after the 2030 census, and some of the special legislation relevant to the current Commonwealth and not to a State would remain in effect.  So a President opposed to Puerto Rican Statehood could make things messy, but he couldn't stop it.

And yet statehood has been vetoed multiple times, so there must be some holes in your reasoning.

[Former President tack50]

Actually, the President has no voice in whether Statehood is granted. Admission is an Article IV power over which the President has no veto, not an Article I power. The reason why Statehood has usually been accomplished by passing an Article I bill is that there are usually some ancillary issues that need to be resolved as well. Without such a bill, Puerto Rico would only have 1 Representative and two Senators until reappointment after the 2030 census, and some of the special legislation relevant to the current Commonwealth and not to a State would remain in effect.  So a President opposed to Puerto Rican Statehood could make things messy, but he couldn't stop it.

And yet statehood has been vetoed multiple times, so there must be some holes in your reasoning.

Has any actual statehood bill actually been vetoed by the president? (as opposed to one chamber voting in favour and the other one opposed)

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Actually, the President has no voice in whether Statehood is granted. Admission is an Article IV power over which the President has no veto, not an Article I power. The reason why Statehood has usually been accomplished by passing an Article I bill is that there are usually some ancillary issues that need to be resolved as well. Without such a bill, Puerto Rico would only have 1 Representative and two Senators until reappointment after the 2030 census, and some of the special legislation relevant to the current Commonwealth and not to a State would remain in effect.  So a President opposed to Puerto Rican Statehood could make things messy, but he couldn't stop it.

And yet statehood has been vetoed multiple times, so there must be some holes in your reasoning.

Has any actual statehood bill actually been vetoed by the president? (as opposed to one chamber voting in favour and the other one opposed)

I'm not aware of any circumstance in which a President vetoed a Statehood proposal.  The only Presidential actions concerning Statehood that I am aware of are various Proclamations that a new State has met the criteria Congress set for becoming a State, with Benjamin Harrison having Secretary of State James G. Blaine shuffling the proclamations for North Dakota and South Dakota randomly before he signed them  and then shuffling them again so that no one could say which was the 39th and which was the 40th.

[politicallefty]

When was the last time the President didn't sign an act admitting a new state (apart from the original 13, of course)?

[jimrtex]

I know DC statehood is unlikely due to the constitution.

But is Puerto Rico statehood as simple as all 3 bodies (WH, SEN, HOR) passing it in a majority up or down vote?

And if so do you think any Dems would vote no?

It also has to be approved by the voters in Puerto Rico.

Traditionally, they write a Constitution and submit for approval by Congress.

[Former President tack50]

I know DC statehood is unlikely due to the constitution.

But is Puerto Rico statehood as simple as all 3 bodies (WH, SEN, HOR) passing it in a majority up or down vote?

And if so do you think any Dems would vote no?

It also has to be approved by the voters in Puerto Rico.

Traditionally, they write a Constitution and submit for approval by Congress.

This leads me to an interesting question which is actually a very realistic scenario given the balance of power in PR and the federal Congress. Could Congress (and the president) force statehood against the territory's will?

Let's say the US congress passes an "admit Puerto Rico" bill or whatever. However, PR's legislature, which as of now has an anti-statehood majority, refuses to act on said bill and write a state constitution. What happens next?

[brucejoel99]

I know DC statehood is unlikely due to the constitution.

But is Puerto Rico statehood as simple as all 3 bodies (WH, SEN, HOR) passing it in a majority up or down vote?

And if so do you think any Dems would vote no?

It also has to be approved by the voters in Puerto Rico.

Traditionally, they write a Constitution and submit for approval by Congress.

This leads me to an interesting question which is actually a very realistic scenario given the balance of power in PR and the federal Congress. Could Congress (and the president) force statehood against the territory's will?

Let's say the US congress passes an "admit Puerto Rico" bill or whatever. However, PR's legislature, which as of now has an anti-statehood majority, refuses to act on said bill and write a state constitution. What happens next?

Good question! The Constitution provides no guidance as to how Congress should exercise its power to admit new states (beyond the admission of a state requiring at least one Act of Congress), nor does it impose any express limits on it (beyond requiring that new states can be carved out of &/or formed from existing states only with the consent of those existing states). Neither is there much guidance from the Framers about its meaning or scope.

As such, much of the practical meaning of the Admissions Clause would have to be drawn from that existing caselaw which has interpreted the Clause or - failing that - from Congress' previous practices in admitting states. Accordingly, it would seem evident that, if taken to court, a judge (& - perhaps eventually - Justices, in the event that the federal government is persistent with its appeals) would likely decide that a territory in question can't be forced to enter the Union against its will.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

DC statehood is likely, if Chairman DURBIN becames chairman, he will usher in DC Statehood than Feinstein that's why she retired

Manchin can simply retract his statement about not going for Filibuster reform if D's assume the Trifecta.

[jimrtex]

I know DC statehood is unlikely due to the constitution.

But is Puerto Rico statehood as simple as all 3 bodies (WH, SEN, HOR) passing it in a majority up or down vote?

And if so do you think any Dems would vote no?

It also has to be approved by the voters in Puerto Rico.

Traditionally, they write a Constitution and submit for approval by Congress.

This leads me to an interesting question which is actually a very realistic scenario given the balance of power in PR and the federal Congress. Could Congress (and the president) force statehood against the territory's will?

Let's say the US congress passes an "admit Puerto Rico" bill or whatever. However, PR's legislature, which as of now has an anti-statehood majority, refuses to act on said bill and write a state constitution. What happens next?

The purpose of a state constitution is to explain how the government of the State is constituted, the mechanics. Things like the Bill of Rights are restrictions on government action, things the legislative branch may not do.

A state constitution is erected by the sovereign People, typically through a constitutional convention and referendum. In theory at least they can ignore the legislature. The People created the legislature, they can ignore it. A convention could just draft a constitution and submit it to Congress, but it would likely be rejected as not having popular support.