The proposed legislation highlights the vulnerability of people in U.S. territories under the current legal framework that allows for continued undemocratic, colonial rule. Whether or not this legislation passes, it promotes the undemocratic idea that Congress can legislate however it wants in U.S. territories, without the consent of the people who live there, and largely unrestrained by express limits on congressional power included in the U.S. Constitution. Further, if the legislation were to pass, people in these territories would remain under the full sovereignty of the United States, just without a right to citizenship. 

Ultimately, these are questions about the scope of federal power, regardless of one’s views on citizenship. This is why Right to Democracy was able to bring together 21 current and former officials in Trump v. Barbara whose views ranged from pro-Statehood, to pro-Independence, to other political status preferences. As explained in the amicus brief they filed:

They each reject the idea that Congress or the President can—consistent with the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment—unilaterally deny U.S. citizenship to those born under the sovereignty and jurisdiction of the United States. At the same time, they each support the distinct issue of a right to self-determination and decolonization—whether that is towards a continuing or separate relationship with the United States.