September 13, 2025

‘Every citizen has right to vote’

Did you know that, if you live in the Northern Mariana Islands but used to live in a state in the U.S. mainland, you have a right to vote for President by absentee ballot? It now appears that the administration of U.S. President Donald J. Trump is planning to strip previous state residents of this ability—which Delegate Gregorio Kilili C. Sablan (Ind-MP) opposes, saying every citizen has a right to vote.

According to the Uniformed Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act, or UOCAVA, U.S. citizens that were previously residents of a state and are currently residing in the CNMI are allowed to cast an absentee vote.

UOCAVA states that a U.S. citizen residing in any part of the world—including the international space station—retain their right to vote in the federal election. However, that law does not extend to citizens residing in the four U.S. territories of Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, and the U.S. Virgin Islands.

According to Sablan, he believes the reason the CNMI was left out was because during the enactment of the law sometime in the 1990s, the CNMI did not have a member in the U.S. Congress.

“… U.S. citizens residing in the Northern Marianas were allowed to vote in federal elections, just as those residing in Israel. Among the territories, overseas Americans residing in the Northern Marianas were allowed to vote under the UOCAVA,” said Sablan.

The U.S. Department of Justice is now reviewing this law, with the intent to reverse this voting privilege.

A letter sent from the USDOJ to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit cited the Sessions v Morales-Santana case, which the U.S. Supreme Court defended a provision in the Immigration and Nationality Act, extending citizenship to certain children with one U.S. citizen parent. The letter was dated Sept. 11, 2017, and was signed by USDOJ Attorney Carleen Zubrzycki.

“… The proper remedy for an equal protection violation consisting of favorable treatment for a discrete group was to eliminate the favorable treatment for that group, rather than expanding more favorable treatment to everyone,” the letter states, specifying that the Seventh Circuit held this as a remedy to the Sessions v Morales-Santana case.

The letter concluded that with the UOCAVA, considering the logic of the Sessions v Morales-Santana case, the best course of action was to dissolve the voting privilege of previous state residents currently residing in the CNMI, rather than to expand the privileges to the four other U.S. territories.

“Under the logic of Sessions v Morales-Santana, if that were an equal protection violation, the proper remedy would be to treat [the] CNMI like the four major territories that the [U.S.] Congress expressly addressed in the [UOCAVA],” the letter reads.

“As a former election official, I promoted this right for U.S. citizens residing in the Northern Marianas and encouraged overseas Americans to vote in federal elections. While the turnout is usually not very high, it has been reported that had the State of Florida allowed counting of ballots mailed by Nov. 26, Al Gore would have won the state and then would have been elected President,” said Sablan.

Gore was the Democratic candidate for the presidency back in 2000. He lost to George W. Bush.

“The number of voters overseas continues to grow. I am not sure about the GOP, but the National Democratic Party has overseas American delegates at their conventions. They cast nomination votes for presidential candidates,” said Sablan.

Sablan believes the worry of Attorney General Jeffrey Sessions is that “overseas Americans” represent a bloc of more liberal voters and thus could be a deciding factor in the election of presidential candidates.”

“I disagree with this because I believe every citizen has a right to vote,” said Sablan.

3 thoughts on “‘Every citizen has right to vote’

  1. Best fact check this thing Mr Sablan, AND Tribune
    Updated 1 : 37 p . m· . ET Aug· . 25 , 2016,
    No constitutional· right·

    The judge· stated U . S . citizens living in the territories do· not have· a constitutional· right· to vote· , which means there is no fundamental· right· for them to vote· .

    The judge· also noted that the U . S . Constitution does not apply in full· to a territory· until the territory· is made a part· of the United States by Congress .

    https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2016/08/25/guam-group-voting-rights-illinois-residents/89340630/

    http://www.pireport.org/articles/2016/04/12/us-senator-decries-lack-voting-rights-territories

    https://www.pri.org/stories/2016-11-01/millions-americans-cant-vote-president-because-where-they-live

    This is OLD news and was tested in court and is NOT anything to do with the Trump Admin. according to these links to past articles.

    1. Former state residents now living in AS, GU, PR & VI cannot vote for president in their old state — unlike citizens residing abroad and in the CNMI, pursuant to UOCAVA.

      Former state residents from three (?) of those territories have challenged this disparity in the Northern District of Illinois, claiming the treatment to be inequitable and to violate equal protection. As you note, they lost, and the case is now before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.

      What is new is that, if necessary to remedy this disparity — in other words, if the district court is reversed and the federal government loses — DOJ is proposing to take away the UOCAVA privilege from ex-statesiders now in the CNMI (including locals who registered to vote stateside at any time), rather than extending it to folks who moved to (or back to) AS, GU, PR & VI.

      This would be an interim remedy, until such time, if ever, as Congress amends UOCAVA following such a ruling. It is similar to what happened when the courts struck down the disparate treatment to children born abroad to one U.S. citizen who was a man or woman — the less generous provision now applies to both.

      Again, this UOCAVA presidential absentee voting privilege only applies to international and certain territorial and commonwealth residents (currently CNMI only) who were formerly registered to vote in a state or DC. By its terms it does not apply to citizens who have only ever been registered in a territory or overseas commonwealth, since they do not have a state to vote in.

      Though if they move abroad, they could still vote for delegate. (!)

Leave a Reply to elkapitan Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © All rights reserved. | Newsphere by AF themes.