Puerto Rico's Ongoing Constitutional Crisis: The Role of the Courts in Governor Succession

The recent political upheaval in Puerto Rico has centered around the role of the courts in determining the rightful successor to the Governor, Ricardo Rosselló. The situation is complicated by ambiguity within the commonwealth's constitution and existing laws, leading to a possible constitutional crisis that could be resolved by the Puerto Rico Supreme Court.

Legitimate Questions and Ambiguous Laws

There are significant questions about how to interpret the commonwealth constitution and Law No. 7 of 1952 (amended in 2005), which determine gubernatorial succession. These laws are laden with ambiguity, and there are multiple valid interpretations depending on how certain key words and phrases are read or interpreted.

Top-notch legal scholars have debated these points, suggesting that the ambiguity is intentional or merely reflects a lack of clarity. This ambiguity leaves the courts in a pivotal position to clarify the legal framework and ensure a smooth transition of power.

The Likely Role of the Supreme Court

Given the current situation, it is almost certain that the Puerto Rico Supreme Court will be called upon to make a final determination. The controversy surrounds whether Pierluisi, the acting Governor, is Rosselló's valid successor, as he was not confirmed by the Senate.

Rosselló claims that the law allows him to make recess appointments without Senate approval, while his opponents argue that such an interpretation is unconstitutional. This disagreement highlights the clear need for a legal resolution, and the Supreme Court is likely to play a critical role in this process.

Potential Legal Scenarios

Several legal scenarios could unfold, each with significant implications:

Senate Appeal: If the Senate appeals the Supreme Court's decision about Pierluisi's appointment, the justices will need to determine the legality of the recess appointment. This would mean the Supreme Court would have to rule on whether the law allowing for such appointments is constitutional.

Confirmations and Re-Appointments: If a new Governor is to be selected, the House and Senate will need to confirm cabinet members as per constitutional requirements. This adds another layer of complexity to the legal framework.

Public Statements and Potential Concessions: Pierluisi has publicly stated that he is willing to step aside if the Senate confirms him after the fact. This statement underscores the delicate nature of the political situation and the potential for a quicker resolution.

Implications for Governance and Legitimacy

The involvement of the courts in these matters raises concerns about the judiciary's role in governance. When the courts intervene in political issues, it can erode public trust. The landmark US Supreme Court case Bush v. Gore, which resolved the 2000 presidential election, is a cautionary tale of judicial overreach.

The courts must be careful to maintain their impartiality and respect for the democratic process. However, the clear ambiguity in the laws and the political stakes involved make it nearly inevitable that the Supreme Court will be called upon to provide clarity.

Conclusion

The ongoing constitutional crisis in Puerto Rico is a complex legal and political issue that demands a clear and unbiased resolution. The role of the Supreme Court in determining the rightful successor to the Governor is crucial and will have significant implications for the stability and legitimacy of Puerto Rico's government.

The case highlights the importance of clear, unambiguous legal frameworks and the potential risks of relying on ambiguous laws. As the situation unfolds, all parties involved must work towards a solution that upholds the rule of law and ensures a degree of public trust in the governance process.