Further more, since Guam is not a state, how is it reasonable that people born on Guam are United States citizens? .
Part One of Article Four, Section Three of the U.S. Constitution, concerns the forming of states within the Union:.
SEC. 3. New States may be admitted by Congress into this Union; but no new States shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States; or Parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress.
Part Two of the same Article and Section of the U.S. Constitution that U.S. states defines territory (as is Guam) as property:.
The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States; and nothing in this Constitution shall be so construed as to Prejudice any Claims of the United States, or of any particular State. .
When acquiring the island of Guam as property (in addition to the other territories), what then was the Federal government to do with Guam's people? Constitutionally speaking, since people cannot be property (not by governments nor by other people) , that by virtue of democracy they should be citizens of the place they inhabit, that because the people of Guam are now U.S. citizens, and that they inhabit U.S. territory (Guam), one would reason that Guam should be a state of the Union -on "equal footing" with other states. In that reasoning, E. Robert Statham, Jr. wrote:.
Unquestionably, the principles of constitutionalism forbid the ownership of human beings by other human beings or by government as the former is slavery and the latter tyranny. The Congress is therefore obligated, upon acquisition of territory, which is inhabited by people, to declare that territory a State of the Union. This action accomplishes two essential objectives.
