Page 17 - Suffolk University Law Review
P. 17
SUFFOLK UNIVERSITY LA W REVTEW [Vol. L:587
they ali follow a pattern that allows the partially independent political entities
to reach a higher leve] of wellbeing than if they were independent. According
to Rezvani, these Partial Independent Territories (PIT) are nationalistically
distinct, but are constitutionally unincorporated organizational forros that share
final decisionmaking powers with a sovereign or core state.!" Core state-PIT
unions are tailor-made to the specific political, nationalistic, and economic
interests of a region rather than a framework that demands transformation of
the core state. PITs are used to classify a distinctive unit of the international
system with a combination of characteristics to address various problems in
global politics, including nationalistic conflict, poverty, security, and
intemational systemic change.
The doctrine of nonincorporation was unfortunately born within American
constitutionalism under the racist premises of the Insular Cases. Voluminous
criticism of these cases place them in the despicable category of Dred Scott v.
Sandford'í' and Plessy v. Ferguson.132 Nevertheless, as Boumediene v. Bush133
indicates, the U.S. Supreme Court repeatedly retums to the selective
Niue ., New Zealand 1974
Northem lreland - UK 1998
Northem Mariana Islands
Nunavut us .1978
Palau
Puerto R.ico Canada 1999
San Marino 1994
Sardinia us 1952
Scotland us 1886
Sicily 1948
Sint Maarten Italy 1998
South Sudan ltaly 1948
Trentino-SouthTvrol UK. 2010
Turks & Caicos lslands ltaly 2005
Voivodina Netherlands 1948
Wales Sudan 2006
Zanzibar Italv 2009
UK 2006
Serbia 1977
UK
Tanzania
130. See id. at 22-27 (discussing characteristics of PITs).
131. 60U.S.(19How.)393(1857).
132. 163 U.S. 537 (1896).
133. 553 u.s. 723 (2008).
they ali follow a pattern that allows the partially independent political entities
to reach a higher leve] of wellbeing than if they were independent. According
to Rezvani, these Partial Independent Territories (PIT) are nationalistically
distinct, but are constitutionally unincorporated organizational forros that share
final decisionmaking powers with a sovereign or core state.!" Core state-PIT
unions are tailor-made to the specific political, nationalistic, and economic
interests of a region rather than a framework that demands transformation of
the core state. PITs are used to classify a distinctive unit of the international
system with a combination of characteristics to address various problems in
global politics, including nationalistic conflict, poverty, security, and
intemational systemic change.
The doctrine of nonincorporation was unfortunately born within American
constitutionalism under the racist premises of the Insular Cases. Voluminous
criticism of these cases place them in the despicable category of Dred Scott v.
Sandford'í' and Plessy v. Ferguson.132 Nevertheless, as Boumediene v. Bush133
indicates, the U.S. Supreme Court repeatedly retums to the selective
Niue ., New Zealand 1974
Northem lreland - UK 1998
Northem Mariana Islands
Nunavut us .1978
Palau
Puerto R.ico Canada 1999
San Marino 1994
Sardinia us 1952
Scotland us 1886
Sicily 1948
Sint Maarten Italy 1998
South Sudan ltaly 1948
Trentino-SouthTvrol UK. 2010
Turks & Caicos lslands ltaly 2005
Voivodina Netherlands 1948
Wales Sudan 2006
Zanzibar Italv 2009
UK 2006
Serbia 1977
UK
Tanzania
130. See id. at 22-27 (discussing characteristics of PITs).
131. 60U.S.(19How.)393(1857).
132. 163 U.S. 537 (1896).
133. 553 u.s. 723 (2008).
