Courts fail – decisions can be overturned, and Congress is more receptive and permanent.

Looking forward, the Supreme Court’s recent decisions, including unan- imously upholding Puerto Rico’s oversight board, suggests that the Court will be less solicitous of equal protection challenges.266 And some programs may be more vulnerable to constitutional attack than others. Programs like SSI and SNAP that have benefit levels for the entire nation except certain ter- ritories seem particularly vulnerable, but Medicaid may be less amenable to litigation by Americans in the territories. Medicaid involves a mix of federal and state funding, and the Supreme Court undid the Affordable Care Act’s attempt to create a national standard of eligibility. The unfavorable signals from the Supreme Court and the difference in programs’ susceptibility to court challenges suggest that Congress may be a more receptive forum to changing the status quo of placing territorial Americans outside the welfare state. Despite being a national legislature that denies meaningful participa- tion to some Americans, including those who are the focus of this Article, Congress could eliminate the territorial exceptionalism in the American wel- fare state. The next Section explains how it could do so.