‘Non-NMDs can vote on Art. 12’
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed yesterday the 2014 landmark decision of U.S. District Court for the NMI Chief Judge Ramona V. Manglona, who ruled that qualified voters who are not of Northern Marianas descent must have the opportunity to vote on Article 12 initiative and any other initiatives to amend Article 12.
In a 17-page opinion, the Ninth Circuit held that the voter restriction in Article 18, section 5(c) of the CNMI Constitution is race-based and violates the 15th Amendment.
The 15th Amendment establishes that “the right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.”
The Ninth Circuit noted that the voting restriction in Article 18, Section 5(c) would divide the CNMI citizenry between NMDs and non-NMDs when voting on amendments to a property restriction that affects everyone.
The Ninth Circuit determined that the 15th Amendment “aims to prevent precisely this sort of division in voting.”
Ninth Circuit Chief Judge Sidney R. Thomas penned the opinion. Circuit judges Consuelo M. Callahan and Mary H. Murguia concurred with Thomas.
The Ninth Circuit judges said that Article 12, Section 4 of the CNMI Constitution contains a race-based definition of NMD. By restricting voting on the basis of this definition, Article 18, Section 5(c) enacts a race-based restriction on voting, the judges said.
Article 18, Section 5(c) thus violates the 15th Amendment, they said.
The Ninth Circuit judges said Manglona was correct to enjoin its enforcement.
In a 51-page decision issued in May 2014, Manglona ruled that Northern Marianas descent, as defined in Section 4 of Article 12 of the CNMI Constitution, is a racial classification, and under federal law it may not serve as the basis for preventing otherwise qualified voters from voting on proposed amendments to Article 12.
“Even if Northern Marianas descent were not a racial classification, it would be unconstitutional to deny non-NMDs the right to vote on Article 12 initiatives because the restriction is not narrowly tailored to achieve a compelling state purpose,” Manglona said.
Manglona issued the ruling in favor of John H. Davis Jr., a registered CNMI voter who, through counsel Jeanne H. Rayphand, sued the Commonwealth Election Commission, its chairperson and executive director, and then-governor Eloy S. Inos in his desire to vote on any initiative to amend Article 12.
Article 12 restricts the acquisition of permanent and long-term interests in real property to persons of NMD.
Article 18 Section 5(c) prohibits qualified voters who are not NMDs from voting on Article 12 initiatives.
CEC and co-defendants, through the Office of the Attorney General, appealed Manglona’s ruling to the Ninth Circuit.
During the pendency of the appeal, the CNMI government sought to enjoin counting of ballots cast in the November 2014 special election. The Ninth Circuit denied the request pending presentation of the motion to the district court. Manglona did not grant the injunction.
The election was held on Nov. 4, 2014. With both NMDs and non-NMDs eligible to vote, a majority of CNMI voters ratified Legislative Initiative 18-1.
Legislative Initiative 18-1 amended the definition of NMD in Article 12, section 4 by altering the required amount of “Northern Marianas Chamorro or Northern Marianas Carolinian blood” to qualify as an NMD from “one quarter” to “some.” It also removed NMD status from adopted children who would not otherwise qualify as NMDs.
It established a court procedure for people with less than “one quarter Northern Marianas Chamorro or Northern Marianas Carolinian blood” to attain legal NMD status.
At the Ninth Circuit hearing, assistant attorney general Charles Edmond Brasington argued for CEC and co-defendants. Rayphand argued for Davis.
Guys, did you get that, need to stay constitutional?
It’s about our ancestral land and sea. Where did you factor in on this issue solely the purview of the indigenous people?
Your Strong …please continue to advocate the Sacred agreement!
This should also mean that all US Citizens can vote and run for President
Puny i’snt it and it’s like thirty some years? Ta agang si Guelo Gaunan fan!
Article XII is nearing its end.
Don’t give up man…we are not U.S. Yet…remember? Plus the Article 12 is Sacred….no one must change it!
Buenas,
That is the problem, Article XII is a CNMI Constitution provision and the United States or the Feds trump our local laws.
Yeah, if that’s the case, kiss Article XII goodbye.
America isn’t exactly known for giving the indigenous people their lands back, nevermind leaving it alone.
Until WE in the territories can vote for the US president in the popular vote, I say this ruling is moot – which is hard for me because I believe in the US Constitution. Speaking of, I thought only the first 10 Amendments applied to us here in the territories?
If not, perhaps we should follow Guam’s lead and think about independence & reunification with our southern brethren?
The last time the locals had any real power was before the Spanish arrived.
Continue to insult my people Ross! Today i personally i announce you my persona non GRATA! Langa’
Be nice chelu. It is what it is and Mr. Mason meant no harm on his opinion above,
This ruling smacks of incompetence. The Covenant Agreement, that is the basis of the relationship between the USA and the people of the Northern Mariana Islands, specifically establishes in Section 805, that land ownership may be restricted to those of Northern Mariana Islands descent. It is NOT based on race. It is based on who lived here at the time. An NMD can be of ANY race. Article 18 Section 5(c) simply protects the rights of these land owners to manage their assets that are wholely theirs.
How is it then that based on RACE, which does not even apply, the court says that non NMDs can vote to overrule the Covenant Agreement?
How is it that people who don’t own private property and public land, both of which belong to the people of Northern Mariana Islands descent, can now exercise control of what does not belong to them?
It appears that what should have been easily defended, a Constitutional Article based on the founding Covenant Agreement, has been poorly defended by allowing it to be challenged #1) based on race, which it is not, and #2 by ignoring the fact that the Covenant Agreement is a foundation document that should be respected as overriding anything in the US Constitution that is contrary to the Covenant Agreement – simply because the USA signed that agreement. The Northern Mariana Islands became part of the United States under the conditions stated in the Covenant Agreement.
If Article 12 can be thrown out, then ANYTHING else in the Covenant Agreement can be thrown out. Certainly that was never the intent of the negociation to create an agreement that can be subsequently ignored.
I hope that this issue is not allowed to stand unchallenged. It is fundamentally, wrong. It is stealing, just as voting to make your neighbor give you his house would be pretty universally recognized as stealing.
Dont worry Mr. Perez…Although thjere seem to be an agonizing dispute about these, i believe that the federal court cant not rule on this because of it’s nature as written and agreed oupon honorably, The fight just started, maybe lift the restriction to other chamorus not officially nmd’s is ok…but to allow them vote on changing the Article 12 to accomodate their needs? UH UH..
If the CNMI were not part of the USA, then Article 12 could remain as it is. If it is repealed by the voters, I don’t know if this a good thing or not. It would certainly increase the sale of land, but then what?
Mr. Mason,
Article XII is ripe to be routed to the US Judicial System and it is just a matter of time before it would be rule unconstitutional. It is a discriminatory provision of the CNMI Constitution and it is unfair for the rest of the United States Citizens in the CNMI. If I can own real property in the State of California guaranteed under the United States constitution, you should be afforded the same in the CNMI. It is a matter of principle, not because the price of land would increase.
Provision like Article 12 creates division among us and it is a breeding ground to discriminate others base on their race. Our Covenant with the United States would never change in our live time, but our constitution can be change over night via US judicial remedies or by CNMI plebiscite.
Not as intended…because our land is limited, America recognizes our dilemna. I’ts a Honorable Agreement…can’t sacrifice the many for the few…esxpecially those who can’t call home where the come form HOME! And they want to make one here… with these attitude…good luck for Unitited Nations can step in intervene! A call from displaced indigeneous minority by colonial powers!
Buenas,
Majority of the United Nations annual budget come from the United States and I am pretty sure, the United Nation would not intervene for such reason. Plus our forefathers chose to displaced our future generations to come via our well paid founding fathers. Decolonization for the CNMI is out of the question, because majority of our people voted to be in a political union with the United States and the General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV) of 14 December 1960 had been fulfill in the CNMI.
Typical colonizer mentality…we are not for sale! Russ, i see the real you…
In Hawaii some years ago this same similar type of court action, all the way to the US Supreme Court happened, (Rice vs Cayatano (State of Hawaii) with the same outcome thus the case set a precedence, as now here followed.
Freddy Rice was from a long time family from the 1800’s and was a rancher, (and fisherman)
Covenant Agreement!
Sir,
I have nothing against anyone, and you are wrong, because I would be boarding my flight to my dearest island in a few days and our CNMI is my home. And I call the CNMI my home. Please, better our medical facilities in the CNMI, so I don’t have to return to the mainland United States to refill my prescriptions every six months. I live and breath in the CNMI also, but for medical reasons, I have to go to the mainland to extend my days on earth.
Tell our elected officials to help us, because it is a one way street in the CNMI.
Wow my prayers of Chamoru compassion and love when we give more and they still take Peter…gety well soon lai!
If justice is Davis’ interest, then his attention should be focused on the very issue you’ve raised herein above! Now, where in the history of the NMI is there established ancestral relationship with Africa?
my family.
The Covenant Agreement is a mutual consent agreement. To ammend there must be on 902 talks and renegotiated and up for refferendum. Mona Manglona forgot that it’s a Honorable agreement! We gave up almost every thing for U.S. Citizenship. America continues to argue that all territiories are only nationals. Giving up our dearest little land…a dot in the vast huge Pacific Ocean for a few…get a life people? This are ancient burial grounds of the Chamorus….Not in my lifetime you dont!
You make it sound like any non NMD can simply take the land. The only way that private property can be sold is to be sold by the owner, correct? No one can force you to sell. But as it stands now, someone can force you NOT to sell your property. This is so typical in societies, this is what I want so this is what everyone else has to do. No one can force you to sell, that is your right. However, someone can force you to not sell, you do not have that right.
Lovely!
Thank you sir!