The Constitution: Spanish-American War Expansion

The question Does the Constitution follow the flag? relates to the extraterritorial reach of the US Constitution and whether it applies to territories acquired by the US through conquest or treaty. This question was a major issue in the 1900 US presidential campaign between Republican William McKinley and Democrat William Jennings Bryan, following the US acquisition of several overseas colonies in the wake of the Spanish-American War. The Democratic Party platform of 1900 declared that the Constitution follows the flag, while opponents believed that normal legal rights and rules did not apply to the new American possessions. This debate has reemerged in the 21st century due to the war on terror, with the US detention operations at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and Bagram, Afghanistan, raising several constitutional questions. The book, Does the Constitution Follow the Flag?: The Evolution of Territoriality in American Law by Kal Raustiala, traces the history of this topic from post-revolutionary America to the present day, exploring how politics and law interact in shaping legal constraints on American foreign policy.

Explore related products

The Spanish War: An American Epic 1898

$20.99 $28.95

Empire by Default: The Spanish-American War and the Dawn of the American Century

$35.05

The Crowded Hour: Theodore Roosevelt, the Rough Riders, and the Dawn of the American Century

$10.16 $20

The War Lovers: Roosevelt, Lodge, Hearst, and the Rush to Empire, 1898

$11.11 $19.99

The Spanish-American War and Philippine Insurrection: 1898–1902 (Men-at-Arms, 437)

$20

The Roughest Riders: The Untold Story of the Black Soldiers in the Spanish-American War

$16.41 $26.95

The 1900 election debate between William McKinley and William Jennings Bryan

The 1900 United States presidential election was a rematch between Republican incumbent President William McKinley and his Democratic challenger, William Jennings Bryan. The election focused on three major issues: imperialism, economic prosperity, and the gold standard.

McKinley's Campaign

McKinley's campaign focused on the theme of economic prosperity, using the slogan "Four More Years of the Full Dinner Pail" to symbolise stability and growth. He argued that his administration's policies, such as protective tariffs, had led to a period of economic expansion and recovery after the economic downturns of the early 1890s. McKinley's victory was attributed to the return of economic prosperity and the recent victory in the Spanish-American War in 1898, which boosted national pride and patriotism. He was also able to bring over 17,000 voters by train to hear him speak, thanks to the financial support of many industrialists.

McKinley supported the gold standard, which had been the basis of US currency since the Coinage Act of 1873, and argued that sticking to gold alone would ensure economic stability and maintain investor confidence. This appealed to bankers, industrialists, and many middle- and upper-class voters who valued financial stability.

McKinley also supported the US expansion and acquisition of overseas territories, particularly after the Spanish-American War. He favoured the continued annexation of territories like Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Philippines, arguing that this expansion would bring economic opportunities and civilisation to both the US and the territories.

Bryan's Campaign

Bryan campaigned vigorously, delivering over 600 speeches and visiting over half of the 45 states. However, his anti-imperialist stance was unpopular, as many Americans saw the country as having a custodial role over its newly acquired territories. Bryan's slogan, "The Republic, Not an Empire," emphasised his belief that America should be a force for freedom rather than an imperial power. He warned that imperialism would entangle the US in foreign conflicts and undermine its democratic values.

Bryan did not directly oppose economic prosperity, but he criticised McKinley's pro-business stance, which he believed favoured wealthy industrialists at the expense of ordinary workers and farmers. Bryan continued his campaign for "free silver," which he had championed in 1896, arguing that allowing both silver and gold to back the currency (bimetallism) would increase the money supply and help farmers and working people. However, with the economy thriving under the gold standard, many voters saw Bryan's proposals as disruptive and even dangerous to the current economic gains.

Bryan faced challenges within his own party, with some Gold Democrats exploring the possibility of a campaign by Admiral George Dewey. However, Bryan was eventually re-nominated at the 1900 Democratic National Convention after Dewey withdrew from the race.

Election Results

The election results were similar to those of 1896, with McKinley winning 51.6% to 51.7% of the popular vote and 292 electoral votes to Bryan's 45.5% and 155 electoral votes. McKinley carried most states outside of the Solid South and picked up several Western states, while Bryan won Kentucky and Ohio. McKinley's victory made him the first president since Ulysses S. Grant in 1872 to win re-election to a consecutive second term.

The US Constitution's relevance to the occupation of Germany and Japan

The Occupation of Germany

After World War II, the Allied forces, led by the United States, occupied Germany. The territory formerly under Nazi control was divided into four zones of occupation, with the Americans basing their headquarters in Frankfurt. The initial rules prohibited fraternization between the German people and the occupying forces to avoid confrontation and give time for adjustment. The primary goals of the occupation were to restore order, keep the peace, and build democracy.

The Occupation of Japan

The United States also played a leading role in the occupation and rehabilitation of Japan after World War II. General Douglas MacArthur, as the Supreme Commander of the Allied Powers, oversaw widespread military, political, economic, and social reforms. The occupation of Japan had two primary goals: demilitarization and democratization. MacArthur and his staff encouraged democratic elections, basic civil liberties, land reform, and the creation of a new Japanese constitution.

The US Constitution's Relevance

The US Constitution was not generally considered directly relevant to the occupation of Germany or Japan. German and Japanese law remained in force, with some exceptions. However, the US Constitution and its principles, such as basic human liberties, influenced the reforms and the new constitutions implemented in these occupied nations. The Supreme Court's decision in Reid v. Covert in 1957 also clarified that the Bill of Rights applies to US citizens abroad, further extending the reach of constitutional protections beyond US borders.

In conclusion, while the US Constitution may not have been directly imposed during the occupations of Germany and Japan, its principles and protections influenced the reforms and shaped the legal and political landscape of these nations during their transition to democracy. The question of the Constitution's extraterritorial reach continues to be a subject of debate and has significant implications for US foreign policy and relations.

The US acquisition of Guantanamo Bay, Cuba

When the war ended, Spain ceded Cuba and several other territories, including Puerto Rico, to the United States. In 1902, the Constitution took effect, and the following year, in 1903, a lease agreement was signed between the United States and the newly independent Republic of Cuba, granting the US permission to use Guantanamo Bay as a naval base. This lease satisfied the Platt Amendment, passed by the US Congress, which required the new Cuban government to lease or sell certain territories to the US.

The Guantanamo Bay Naval Base covers 116 square kilometres on the western and eastern banks of the bay and is divided into sections. It has been a strategic location for the US, defending the Panama Canal and the southern US coast, and serving as a natural haven for naval vessels. The lease agreement, which has no fixed expiration date, included provisions allowing the US to occupy, use, and modify the properties for its naval station and coaling station needs. Cuba retained ultimate sovereignty, but the US was given sole jurisdiction over the leased areas.

Over the years, the Guantanamo Bay Naval Base has been a site of controversy. Since the Cuban Revolution of 1953-1959, the Cuban government has only cashed one of the rent cheques from the US, claiming it was deposited due to confusion. The base has also been used to house Cuban and Haitian refugees, with more than 20,000 Haitians and 30,000 Cubans intercepted at sea and brought to camps in Guantanamo in the summer of 1994.

Following the events of September 11, 2001, Guantanamo Bay became a detention facility for individuals deemed a risk to US national security, including al-Qaeda detainees, leading to international criticism. In 2009, President Barack Obama ordered the closure of the detention camp, but it remains open due to congressional refusal of funds for its closure.

The question of whether the US Constitution applies to Guantanamo Bay and other territories acquired through conquest is a complex one, known as the "Insular Cases". The Supreme Court's decision in Reid v. Covert in 1957 overturned the rule that the Bill of Rights did not apply abroad, extending constitutional protections to citizens abroad. However, the constitutional constraints on the US government's actions in occupied territories or leased territories pursuant to treaties are weaker, and the applicability of the Constitution to non-citizens abroad remains a subject of debate.

Explore related products

Manila and Santiago: The New Steel Navy in the Spanish-American War

$17.25 $31.95

Spanish-American War: The Conflict That Transformed America's Global Role

$3.99 $7.99

The Wars of Spanish American Independence 1809–29 (Essential Histories, 77)

$24

US Navy Battleships 1886–98: The pre-dreadnoughts and monitors that fought the Spanish-American War (New Vanguard, 271)

$19.77

Spain In Our Hearts: Americans in the Spanish Civil War, 1936–1939

$10.49 $24.99

The Spanish-Cuban-American War and the Birth of American Imperialism, Vol. 1 1895-1898 (Modern reader)

$25

The US-annexed Philippines and interrogation techniques

The question of whether the US Constitution applies to territories beyond its borders has been a subject of debate for over a century, with the "Insular Cases" being a series of US Supreme Court decisions determining that the Constitution does not fully apply to territories acquired through conquest after the Spanish-American War. This includes the Philippines, which became a US colony after the war.

The US annexation of the Philippines was justified as a liberation and protection of the Filipino people from European powers. However, this annexation was met with opposition from anti-imperialists, including Senator Benjamin Tillman, who argued that it would lead to an influx of non-white immigrants and their potential involvement in the American government. Despite this, the US established a colonial government in the Philippines in 1900, led by future President William Howard Taft, which launched a "policy of attraction" to win over Filipinos and undermine the revolutionaries.

The Philippine-American War, which lasted from 1899 to 1902, resulted in the deaths of over 4,200 American and over 20,000 Filipino combatants, as well as 200,000 Filipino civilians. The war was brutal, with both sides employing violent tactics, including the burning of villages and the use of torture. The US military had significant advantages, including a trained fighting force, steady supplies, and control of the archipelago's waterways, while the Filipino forces lacked outside support and suffered from weapon shortages.

The interrogation techniques used during the Philippine-American War are not explicitly mentioned in the sources. However, it is likely that they involved harsh and coercive methods, given the nature of the conflict and the reported use of torture by US forces. The US military's superior position and the lack of international constraints may have further contributed to the use of aggressive interrogation techniques during this period.

The question of whether the Constitution follows the flag remains relevant in modern times, especially in the context of the war on terror and US occupations in Iraq and Afghanistan. While some argue that basic constitutional protections do not apply to non-citizens abroad, others, like the Supreme Court's decision in Reid v. Covert, suggest that the Constitution should protect citizens and non-citizens alike when confronted by the US government, even in foreign territories.

The expansion of US extraterritorial power post-9/11

The question of whether the US Constitution applies beyond US borders ("does the constitution follow the flag?") has been a subject of debate for over a century. The "Insular Cases", a series of US Supreme Court decisions from 1901 to 1922, established the doctrine that the US Constitution does not apply fully to territories acquired through conquest, such as Puerto Rico, Guam, and the US Virgin Islands. This doctrine has never been overruled and continues to shape the lives of the four million people living in these territories.

In the post-9/11 era, the expansion of US extraterritorial power has been marked by a massive increase in executive power and a shift in culture, with heightened levels of fear and surveillance. Within months of the attacks, the Bush Administration authorized spying on Americans, a new military tribunal system, and the secret detention of men from Muslim and Arab countries. Congress facilitated this expansion of executive power by passing legislation like the Patriot Act and the Military Commissions Act, which enhanced surveillance tools and authorized the use of military force against perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks.

The US government's actions in the War on Terror have brought the question of extraterritoriality to the forefront once again. The US has detained prisoners at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and its occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan has raised questions about the applicability of constitutional protections for non-citizens abroad. While some commentators and courts have argued that constitutional protections do not extend to non-citizens, others point to the 1957 Supreme Court decision in Reid v. Covert, which suggests that the Bill of Rights should protect citizens and non-citizens alike, even outside US borders.

In his book, "Does the Constitution Follow the Flag?", Kal Raustiala explores the evolution of territoriality in American law and foreign policy. Raustiala argues that American assumptions about sovereignty and territory have changed, and the legal limits of territorial sovereignty have diminished to accommodate the expanding American empire. The post-9/11 world has seen an increase in US extraterritorial power, with multiple presidents interpreting the Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) to extend their authority beyond Afghanistan, to countries like Iraq, Yemen, and Somalia.

Frequently asked questions