The question of status – the exact constitutional relationship between an overseas territory and the metropole – is one of the keys to politics and development in the territories. In states governed by due process of law and administration and obliged to adhere to a constitution, judicial precedent and parliamentary legislation, the precise nature of a territory's status is crucial. It determines the legal personality of the territory, and opens or closes the door to social services, right of abode in the metropole, and financial subsidies. Status questions animate political life in some territories; in a few, practically every election is a plebiscite on status and every political forum a chance to debate the issue.

Options for changing status range from total integration to outright separation between overseas territories and administering states. Yet the choice is never so simple as those polarities, and many proposals advanced in recent years have outlined intermediate statuses between the two extremes. The exact nature of these – questions of citizenship, division of authority between national and local administrations, drawing of boundaries and definition of electorates, access to government transfers and social services - is both a highly complex legal and constitutional problem, and an issue filled with major political and economic repercussions. The case of the United States Virgin Islands (USVI) illustrates some of the options.