A legal opinion by Attorney General Edward Manibusan shared this week labels several attempted amendments to casino law last year as \u201cunconstitutional\u201d and outside legislative authority, and gives some background to Gov. Ralph DLG Torres\u2019 exercise of veto powers that House majority leaders in turn declared as \u201cunconstitutional.\u201d <\/p>\n
It appears to be two-way street of cries of unconstitutionality, in the most recent dispute between the executive and legislative branch. On Tuesday, House leaders rallied on the grounds that Torres had no authority to line-item veto House bill 19-95, an amendment to the casino law, after passing both upper and lower house late last year. House leaders essentially declared Torres\u2019 line-item vetoes\u2014of casino tax relief and legislative oversight of casino license revocation, among others\u2014as inappropriate, arguing that bill was not an appropriations bill\u2014as Torres deemed it\u2014and therefore outside the mark of the governor\u2019s veto pen.<\/p>\n
However, acting governor Victor Hocog scoffed yesterday at House leaders who poised the option of override during the Tuesday session. \u201cSo what happened?\u201d Hocog told reporters after a proclamation-signing event. \u201cSo why didn\u2019t they override [the bill]? Was the session intended yesterday for the override action?\u201d<\/p>\n
An override discussion was not scheduled on Tuesday\u2019s agenda but put on the table after lawmakers pulled out Torres\u2019 veto message letter from early December, some two months ago.<\/p>\n
\u201cI can only say that, that it is their prerogative,\u201d Hocog went on to say. \u201cIf they feel it is was it is in their opinion, they should act on it before the time runs out. Right?\u201d The deadline for override is today.<\/p>\n
Asked if he shared the position that the casino law amendment was an appropriations bill\u2014which House leaders disagree with\u2014Hocog said, this was a \u201ctwo-way street.\u201d He went on to note the bill\u2019s provisions to provide full time positions at the Commonwealth Casino Commission and funding to monitor the Best Sunshine International, Ltd.\u2019s temporary casino. <\/p>\n
If the recent law legitimizes the gaming commission\u2019s regulatory powers, Hocog said, then the commission would \u201cdefinitely\u201d have been impacted by an override. But still, if House proceeded with an override and the Senate \u201csat on it\u201d then \u201cwhat\u2019s the use?\u201d Hocog asked.<\/p>\n
If lawmakers felt strongly about their position that Torres\u2019 actions were unconstitutional, Hocog said, \u201cthen they should have come over and discussed that\u201d with the executive branch so they could \u201cagree on what do\u201d or \u201cexpedite\u201d new legislation without affecting the operations of the casino commission. <\/p>\n
According to Hocog, lawmakers never brought the issue to his or the Executive Branch\u2019s attention. \u201cI was a little bit surprised yesterday when I was given a heads up that the House is considering to override the governor\u2019s line-item veto.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cThe best bet is to sit down,\u201d Hocog said, \u201cand come up with a language that will satisfy constitutional sufficiency. And at the same time, \u201cnot jeopardize\u201d the provisions \u201cthat provided employment and operations of the gaming commission.\u201d<\/p>\n
Hocog welcomed the leaders in the House to sit down with the governor, himself, and the attorney general and discuss \u201cwhat is unconstitutional\u201d so \u201cthey could correct it before codification.\u201d<\/p>\n
AG opinion<\/strong><\/p>\n When pressed, Torres officials continued to maintain that the main intent of House Bill 19-95 was to appropriate money. And because of this, officials said, they went through the same steps that an appropriations bill would require, and line-item vetoed the bill\u2019s \u201cblatant, unconstitutional\u201d provisions.<\/p>\n From attorney to client, Manibusan, in a letter to Torres last year, wrote of \u201clegal issues\u201d with House Bill 19-95. <\/p>\n On an amendment to casino law that would have prevented Saipan casino regulators from revoking the casino license \u201cwithout the consent of both houses of the Legislature,\u201d Manibusan said, lawmakers did not possess this constitutional authority.<\/p>\n \u201cThe Commonwealth government is divided into three coordinate branches,\u201d he said, and the separation of powers doctrine \u201csafeguard[s] the independence of each branch of the government and protect it from domination and interference by others.\u201d<\/p>\n The Executive Branch is responsible for the execution of the laws of the Commonwealth, Manibusan said, and \u201crequiring legislative approval for the revocation of the casino license violates the separation of powers doctrine because the Commonwealth Legislature would be exercising a power that the constitution has assigned to the Executive Branch.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cWhile the Commonwealth Legislature can prescribe general rules on the regulation of casino gambling in the Commonwealth, it has absolutely no authority to require legislative approval of the revocation of the casino license,\u201d he added.<\/p>\n Further, the Commonwealth Constitution requires legislation to be presented to the governor for approval or veto, Manibusan said. \u201cAny attempt to allow the Legislature to overturn an agency division without the governor\u2019s consent would violate\u201d the NMI Constitution.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" A legal opinion by Attorney General Edward Manibusan shared this week labels several attempted amendments…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":47,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[900],"tags":[54,3126,1414,194],"class_list":["post-220143","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-featured","tag-agency","tag-commonwealth-casino-commission","tag-executive-branch","tag-house-bill"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/220143","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/47"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=220143"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/220143\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=220143"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=220143"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=220143"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}