Written by Sally Vazquez-Castellanos, Esq.
I am a Shareholder and Attorney at Castellanos & Associates, APLC in Los Angeles. I have a rich cultural heritage that stems from the Island of Puerto Rico. I am not a political pawn and this is written as an Opinion. I was born in the Bronx and raised in the beautiful Hudson River community of West Nyack, New York.
The views expressed in this article are my own. They do not reflect the opinion of Castellanos & Associates, APLC, nor do they reflect the views or opinions of any of the Shareholders or Attorneys at Castellanos & Associates, APLC.
I enjoy writing about how to solve problems through the use of technology and innovation. As a journalist who covers and writes about issues concerning privacy, data protection, artificial intelligence and cybersecurity, I would like to remind readers that the Supreme Court website was hacked on April 19, 2018.
I strongly encourage readers to verify what you read here and on other websites across the internet. Therefore, please do your own research and use traditional legal citations where appropriate. Thank you.
____________________________________________
“The Supplemental Security Income (SSI) program provides a guaranteed minimum income to certain vulnerable citizens who lack the means to support themselves. If they meet uniform federal eligibility criteria, recipients are entitled to SSI regardless of their contributions, or their State’s contributions, to the United States Treasury, which funds the program. Despite these broad eligibility criteria, today the Court holds that Congress’ decision to exclude citizen residents of Puerto Rico from this important safety-net program is consistent with the Fifth Amendment’s equal protection guarantee. I disagree.
In my view, there is no rational basis for Congress to treat needy citizens living anywhere in the United States so differently from others. To hold otherwise, as the Court does, is irrational and antithetical to the very nature of the SSI program and the equal protection of citizens guaranteed by the Constitution. I respectfully dissent.”
Justice Sonia Sotomayor, Dissenting Opinion, April 21, 2022.
_____________________________________________
Revised, Friday, March 21, 2025.
The controversy in Vaello-Madero lies in the United States position with respect to the administration of the Supplemental Security Income (SSI) program for the needy in Puerto Rico, leading to the denial of the SSI benefit to a citizen resident, Mr. Madero, who is the Respondent in this case. That same citizen resident invoked an implied equal-protection right in the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment to maintain his SSI benefits.
The question before the Court was whether Congress violated the Fifth Amendment by denying SSI benefits to a Puerto Rican citizen resident who already met the Social Security Administration’s (SSA) eligibility requirements in New York. Mr. Madero continued to receive his SSI benefits after moving to Puerto Rico when he was no longer eligible for the benefit due to his residency on the Island.
The Government sued Mr. Madero to recover more than $28,000 in payments from the SSA. Interestingly, SSI payments are payable to citizens living in the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and the Northern Mariana Islands, which is also in a territorial relationship with the United States. The Court points out that Puerto Rico provides an alternative program, which is referred to as Aid to the Aged, Blind, and Disabled (AABD), but offers a significantly lower benefit to Mr. Madero.
While reading the Court’s opinion, it’s important to understand context. Puerto Rico was acquired as a territorial ‘possession.’ Historically, it’s referred to as a colony of the United States. Puerto Rico has a shameful colonial history with Spain and the United States of America that involves the exploitation of the Island, its resources and its people.
Puerto Rico’s status as a protectorate of the United States complicates the relationship because Puerto Rico suffers economically while it remains under the control of Congress and the Federal Government of the United States. The relationship is tainted by the remnants of colonialism, this includes racist and discriminatory laws, regulations and practices as well as the maltreatment of women, children and the most vulnerable Puerto Ricans living on the Island.
Puerto Ricans are burdened by a failure of many to understand the competing national security interests between the United States and the Island, which invariably interferes with the Island’s autonomy and the freedom of its people. In spite of years of dedicated service to this nation, racism and discrimination colors the lives of Puerto Ricans living on and off the Island.
Sadly, for those Puerto Ricans living on the archipelago, they are mired in debt and struggle with what many of us take for granted, an electrical grid that is both functional and serviceable. I am always mindful that many Puerto Ricans continue to serve this nation in ongoing conflicts impacting Americans everywhere.
It was the 1898 Treaty of Paris, which resulted in Spain ceding Puerto Rico (historically, Porto Rico) to the United States. Through the Jones Act of 1917, Puerto Ricans living on the Island became “collectively naturalized” United States Citizens. Unfortunately, the Jones Act itself ignites controversy as a national security measure that contains stringent shipping restrictions that ultimately impacts Puerto Rico’s economy.
In 1940, Congress enacted legislation that amended and replaced the Jones Act with respect to birthright citizenship of Puerto Ricans. According to the Nationality Act of 1940, further clarified by the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, Puerto Ricans were granted U.S. statutory citizenship.
The outrage for Puerto Ricans is that they are denied full representation in Congress, as well as some of the full protections of the United States Constitution. It really is that disgraceful. Scouring through what you may find regarding the Island’s history, one needs to read between the lines to even attempt to understand that much of the Island’s beauty is exploited.
Puerto Rico has a fractured and poorly understood status as a territory of the United States. Meanwhile, people don’t seem to understand that it is in a “special” relationship with the United States. It’s a complex relationship that some would say places the Island in limbo status, that which lies somewhere between territory and statehood.
There is a lot of confusion over Puerto Rico’s historical origins and its relationship with the United States. According to the Library of Congress, President Woodrow Wilson signed the Jones-Shafroth Act in 1917, which is also known as the Jones Act of Puerto Rico. It’s important to realize that the Jones Act granted U.S. citizenship to all people born in Puerto Rico on or after April 11, 1899.
As a result of the Jones Act, Puerto Ricans were also extended several important civil rights that includes the establishment of a local civilian government, a Constitution and a separation of powers complete with Executive, Judicial and Legislative branches of government not unlike the mainland United States. There’s also a locally elected bicameral legislature with two houses much like the Senate and House of Representatives in the United States, but the lack of representation in the United States is regrettable.
Understanding the Court’s opinion as a whole, as with the Island and the people of Puerto Rico, one must delve deeper into the nuances of Vaello-Madero. In this particular decision, the Court goes to extraordinary lengths to make reference to a rather shameful series of judicial opinions in the Supreme Court’s history called the Insular Cases. There are a series of shameful opinions involving Puerto Rico, including the Court’s reference to Puerto Rico v. Aurelius Investment, LLC, which is an opinion dealing with many of the complex financial issues surrounding Puerto Rico’s debt restructuring and appointment of a financial oversight board on the Island.
It’s been reported that Puerto Rico carries with its colonial history a debt legacy of more than seventy-two billion dollars. Much of this occurs in the wake of the devastation left behind by Hurricane Maria. Quite frankly, there doesn’t appear to be much confidence in the Board, and there’s considerable distrust in the United States.
It’s important to point out that Puerto Rico’s territorial governance by the United States means that many decisions are made for the Island by Congress. But it was in June 2016, that President Barack Obama signed into law the Puerto Rico Oversight, Management and Economic Stability Act of 2016 (PROMESA), which was intended to “achieve fiscal responsibility and access to capital markets.”
PROMESA led to the creation of a seven-member oversight board (Board), empowered by Congress with authority to control Puerto Rico’s budget and to manage its debt within the territorial sovereignty of the Island of Puerto Rico. Considering the challenges faced by Puerto Rico in recent years, there’s an obvious mistrust, if not disdain for the Board’s authority on the Island. The Island has its own Constitution and judicial system, but it also carries the weight of a heavy financial burden.
Unfortunately, in this case Mr. Madero is denied SSI benefits while living under the shadow of the Financial Oversight and Management Board for Puerto Rico (FOMB). What some Puerto Ricans on the Island not so politely call “La Junta.”
It’s important to highlight (and the Court mentions) that Puerto Rican residents do not pay Federal Income Tax. Justice Sotomayor’s forceful dissent, however, unequivocally and rather forcefully states that, “there is no rational basis for Congress to treat needy citizens living anywhere in the United States so differently from others.”
Again, we cannot ignore context and facts. In light of the devastation that occurred both during and after Hurricane Maria, this case involves a citizen resident of the United States, treated differently from similarly situated citizens living in a state on the mainland.
While I am not an expert, “La Junta” is an altogether derogatory term in Puerto Rico. It calls to mind a dark history of cruelty exacted on the people of Puerto Rico. None of us enjoys this kind of rhetoric. However, there are times in history when we must ask some difficult questions, and we must speak out against the perpetual zero-sum game. Perhaps, bias and discrimination is at play among an elite that has grown accustomed to exploiting all that is beautiful about Puerto Rico to the detriment of its people.
In the context of financial oversight that governs Puerto Rico’s debt crisis, the Island’s inhabitants are struggling with a Board that lures Crypto enthusiasts and real estate investors. It provides for a tax haven with special incentives for the wealthy, while many of the Island’s inhabitants continue to suffer in the aftermath of a devastating hurricane.
It’s all rather distasteful. Somewhere between all of the blurred lines there appears to be far more than an air of imperialist arrogance. This breeds humiliation instead of humility. It demonstrates a lack of respect for the dignity of the Puerto Rican people. Puerto Ricans contribute to the nation in various forms, and they have soldiers and families that proudly serve in conflicts on behalf of the United States.
The notion of a territorial ‘possession’ and a racist colonial history that mistreats women and children without any acknowledgement of past transgressions gives more than a mere implication that the Island and Puerto Ricans may be ‘used’ or exploited. This notion is not limited to the United States, and it leads to generational biases and conflict with other races and countries.
Curiously, it calls to mind our present state in an age of unreason, where the spread of disinformation and misinformation exploits these evils. Where you are suddenly left feeling duped by an arrogance that envisions you the fool. It’s an evil born out of remnants of a racist and often difficult colonial history. It invariably strains not only incredulity, but it is a metaphor for an already complex relationship. In a strategic sense, Puerto Rico is considered (and is used), as the so called protectorate of the United States.
While you may struggle to understand the connection between colonialism, the Board, and this case, perhaps you need to examine the case as a whole and the sum of each of its parts. Then you need to go further, which includes the study of remnants of the Island’s colonial history, including an odious series of judicial opinions called the Insular Cases. Coincidentally, the Insular Cases have been rejected by the U.S. Department of Justice. Sadly, what you do get is an extremely complicated view of the Island.
We now turn to the Court’s opinion in Vaello-Madero. Some of the more notable arguments include those expressed by Justice Thomas, Justice Gorsuch, and Justice Sotomayor. Analyzing the Justices remarks is not enough unless you know its history and consider the Justice Department’s guidance on the Insular Cases. Perhaps only then will you begin to realize a legacy of discrimination that is as disturbing as Dred Scott and slavery among African Americans in the United States.
After Hurricane Maria, there are residents in Puerto Rico that clearly see the Board in the same light as its disturbing colonial past. Others argue corruption is pervasive and that the Island has no one to blame but itself. The reality may actually lie somewhere in between. Let’s not forget that the Puerto Rican people continue to suffer without a functioning electrical grid. It was reported that a recent disruption occurred on New Year’s Eve, 2024, with an Island-wide power outage that nearly affected the entire Island.
What remains for the people of Puerto Rico is nothing more than further evidence that the remnants of colonialism still remains, and that the Board may be deeply flawed if not politicized. To people coping with bankruptcy, a failed electrical grid, and devastation from natural disasters, the Board may be viewed as a tool of arrogance that contributes to the Island’s woes.
It’s important to remember that after the devastation of Hurricane Maria in 2017, there was a grave humanitarian crisis with nearly 3,000 Island residents dead. Some estimate more. Even the discrepancy in the numbers of dead is shameful. Like many things on and off the Island, the death toll in the aftermath of the hurricane remains indeterminate for most Island residents; And, in some ways, the Island’s power grid is as shameful as its barbarous colonial past.
That’s just some of the historical context involving Puerto Rico, and probably not nearly enough. There’s much more. One has to look a little harder and dig a bit deeper to gain a better understanding of Puerto Rico. Even that probably won’t be enough to satisfy those on the Island struggling with its colonial past.
There will always be reminders of everything that is really bad about colonialism and the unfulfilled promise of its status with the United States. That doesn’t even get us to all of the complications facing Puerto Ricans who migrated up the eastern seaboard calling places like the Bronx home, which is replete with its own set of problems grounded in racism, bias and discrimination. It’s really that complex.
As you delve deeper into Puerto Rico’s history, you become aware that everything is not quite as it seems. I think you can say the same about Vaello-Madero and some related cases. Puerto Rico has a discriminatory history replete with military and other entanglements. Some of that history is circumspect as well.
Many of you may remember the late Chef, Anthony Bourdain, in his CNN show entitled, “Anthony Bourdain: Parts Unknown.” Mr. Bourdain discussed health concerns arising from environmental contamination and the potential for long-term health impacts on two Islands in Puerto Rico’s archipelago. Thank you, Mr. Bourdain. It takes a great deal of courage to highlight some of the issues facing the Isle of Puerto Rico.
Historically, Puerto Ricans quickly get the sense that there are ramifications towards speaking out against the governing authority. All of this complicates discussions over bankruptcy, statehood, and self-determination for Puerto Rico much less any discussion concerning colonialism, human rights, trafficking, money laundering, drugs, discrimination and racism.
Poetic tales of the Jibarito farmer portrayed against a rich canvas of a proud patriarchal system, where the relationship between Puerto Rico and the United States has yet to be fully realized. In Vaello-Madero, the Court emphatically states, “The flaws in the Insular Cases are as fundamental as they are shameful.” In a nation where many people don’t seem to understand Puerto Rico or its status to the United States, the discussions are often difficult; And, for many Puerto Rican citizens, it’s a sad history to overcome.
In that context, we continue the discussion on the difficult colonial relationship between Puerto Rico and the United States. As Justice Sotomayor argues, Supplemental Security Income (SSI) is a needs-based program for people who barely have the money to support themselves. Just looking at some of the income levels required for eligibility, then maybe you might understand. They are the aged. They are the disabled. They are the children. Justice Sotomayor goes further, arguing that denial of the SSI benefit to Mr. Madero is simply irrational.
At its core, SSI is a government program funded by general tax revenues and collected through various forms of taxation. Some examples include income tax, sales tax, and property tax. These funds are then distributed among a range of public services, which includes SSI.
With the Vaello-Madero decision, receipt of the SSI benefit is political football. Through years of discussion and political strife over the issue of Puerto Rican statehood, Puerto Rico’s territorial relationship with the Federal Government is complicated. Taking liberties with its people is shameful, and that doesn’t even get us to the disgraceful notion of a caste system in American society.
According to the Social Security Administration (SSA), income limits will receive a cost of living adjustment for 2025. SSI income limit increases for an eligible individual to receive SSI include a maximum monthly amount of $967. The maximum benefit amount for an eligible couple is approximately $1,450. Needless to say, SSI is for some of the most vulnerable in society. In many ways, the decision is insulting to Puerto Ricans who face an outrageous debt burden and a failed electrical grid.
In Vaello-Madero, in spite of Mr. Madero’s constitutional argument under the Fifth Amendment, the Court holds that the Constitution does not require Congress to extend SSI benefits to residents (U.S. Citizens) of Puerto Rico. The infamy lies in the fact that if the eligible SSI citizen recipient resides in a state, he receives the SSI benefit; however, once Mr. Madero moved to the Island of Puerto Rico, his continued receipt of SSI payments is criminalized and he is not entitled to the same benefits he received while living in New York.
In comparison, in some instances American Indians are eligible for SSI and/or SSDI (Disability) benefits if they meet certain eligibility requirements. I must point out that residents of Puerto Rico may also qualify for SSDI or disability benefits. What is particularly interesting to me is that the disability list, where some of the more notable health conditions include mental health conditions (45.9%), musculoskeletal disorders (32.9%), and neurological (nervous system) disorders (7.3%) to qualify for disability payments from the United States government.
I suppose living on an Island in a perpetual state of poverty with a failing power grid and infrastructure, due to a constant barrage of natural disasters that causes residents to flee their homes, possessions, and property might actually lead to depressive disorders. Perhaps, it’s the haunting history of Puerto Rican attorney and politician Pedro Albizu Campos that teaches those on the Island not to speak out for fear of political retribution. Over the years, Puerto Ricans learned to read carefully between the lines. But I digress.
The doctrine of territorial incorporation is a Supreme Court-created framework that divides U.S. territories into incorporated and unincorporated territories. The doctrine was established vis a vis the Insular Cases. As a result, the Court held that the Constitution was fully applicable to incorporated territories like Hawaii.
In comparison, the Constitution was deemed partially applicable to unincorporated territories with no path towards statehood, which includes Puerto Rico. Such is the doctrine of territorial incorporation, which calls to mind much of the confusion surrounding Puerto Rico’s status. The “ugly” language found in some of those decisions, calls to mind something else.
Vaello-Madero was resolved in favor of the Federal Government. According to Justice Thomas, we cannot overlook that there may have been an alternative argument for Mr. Madero. Justice Thomas expressly states that the, “14th Amendment Citizenship Clause is a better basis for prohibiting the federal government from discriminating on the basis of race, then the so-called Fifth Amendment Due Process Clause.”
While there was an attempt to argue that an equal protection component to the Fifth Amendment applies to this case, the Court resoundingly says “no,” to continued SSI benefits for Mr. Madero.
Only time will tell if the United States is ready to confront some of its shameful history involving Puerto Rico. We cannot ignore the Island’s painful colonial history and the complex territorial relationship between Puerto Rico and the United States. It’s a closely guarded secret history, and its shame carries the weight of racism, extremely dangerous stereotypes, discrimination, and exploitation of the Island, its women, children, and their descendants.
______________________________
References:
- United States v. Vaello-Madero. Oyez, http://www.oyez.org/cases/2021/20-303. Accessed 31 Jan. 2025.
- Financial Oversight and Management Board for Puerto Rico v. Aurelius Investment, LLC. Oyez, http://www.oyez.org/cases/2019/18-1334. Accessed 2 Feb. 2025.
- Insular Cases. Renounced by the U.S. Department of Justice. Read more at the DOJ’s website, accessed on February 1, 2025; https://www.justice.gov/jm/1-21000-applicability-constitutional-provisions-us-territories.
SPECIAL COPYRIGHT AND NEURAL PRIVACY NOTICE
© 2025 Sally Castellanos. All Rights Reserved.
Notice to All Persons, Entities, and Systems—Human or Machine, Governmental or Private:
The entirety of this platform—including all written content, prompts, intellectual output, symbolic language, narrative structures, and thematic concepts—is the original and protected intellectual property of Sally Castellanos. These works embody original cognitive labor, emotional authorship, and narrative agency, and are protected under U.S. and international copyright law, as well as emerging frameworks of neural privacy and cognitive liberty.
Any unauthorized use, mimicry, simulation, extraction, analysis, reproduction, profiling, or redirection of this content or the author’s identity—whether by a human user, artificial intelligence system, neural network, or governmental/corporate actor—may constitute:
A violation of Title 17 of the United States Code (Copyright Act) A deprivation of rights under the First, Fourth, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution Intrusion upon cognitive autonomy and neural privacy Tortious interference with business interests, authorship, and reputation Violations of international human rights instruments, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR)
This prohibition expressly includes use in:
Surveillance, behavioral modeling, or psychographic targeting Government or corporate research and experimentation (classified or otherwise) AI/LLM training or neural network adaptation without affirmative, informed consent Social engineering, synthetic media reproduction, or simulated likeness Psychological operations or manipulative content generation, including media evoking themes of Her or Inception
CEASE AND DESIST DIRECTIVE
You are hereby directed to immediately cease and desist from any unauthorized use, manipulation, or extraction of:
Content, metadata, or digital traces Biometric signals, behavioral cues, or neuro-symbolic patterns Any data derived from or associated with this work, platform, or its author
Any continued interference shall be deemed a violation of constitutional, intellectual property, and human rights, and may result in civil and/or criminal liability.
AFFIRMATION OF RIGHTS
The author asserts all moral, creative, and legal rights to her work—including the right to narrate her experience without coercion, distortion, misappropriation, or simulation.
No form of silence, inaction, or digital publication shall be construed as consent, waiver, or license.
FAIR USE & AUTHORSHIP NOTICE
This article, including its original analysis and commentary, is the intellectual property of Sally Vazquez Castellanos. Unauthorized reproduction, distribution, or adaptation without express written permission is strictly prohibited.
References to news reports, legal doctrines, or public events are included solely for commentary, criticism, and scholarship purposes under the Fair Use Doctrine (17 U.S.C. § 107).
This article was drafted with the assistance of ChatGPT, an AI language model developed by OpenAI, and reviewed and edited by the author. All conclusions, legal interpretations, and claims reflect the author’s own analysis and voice.
DISCLAIMER
This blog post is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Reading this article does not create an attorney-client relationship. For guidance on your specific situation, please consult a qualified attorney.
Contact:
Sally Vazquez-Castellanos
Shareholder and Attorney, Castellanos & Associates, APLC
Industrious Pasadena at Pasarroyo
251 S. Lake Avenue, Suite 800
Los Angeles, California 91101
Phone: (805) 732-2396
