New State Equality: The Ambiguous History of a Constitutional Principle

Abstract

In Coyle v. Smith (1911), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Congress could not impose admissions conditions on new states that detracted from their equal standing in the union. Previously, the Court had deferred to Congress' authority over federal territory and over its own membership. Before the Civil War, federal interests in new states-particularly with respect to public lands-were secured through admissions conditions. Later, however, admissions compacts became increasingly redundant; the Court grounded federal property claims in the new states on the rules and regulations provision of the Constitution. Meanwhile, in a series of decisions, the Court began to uphold the municipal sovereignty of the territories against congressional interference. Congress' authority in the territories was progressively limited to that of acting as trustee for future states. These doctrinal developments culminated in Coyle. The Court challenged Congress' right to set invidious admission conditions and asserted its own jurisdiction over the state-making process. The new state equality principle thus became constitutional as the Court extended its authority.