{"id":83580,"date":"2004-08-26T09:01:00","date_gmt":"2004-08-26T09:01:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/a06dc2aa-1dfb-11e4-aedf-250bc8c9958e"},"modified":"2004-08-26T09:01:00","modified_gmt":"2004-08-26T09:01:00","slug":"a06dc2bd-1dfb-11e4-aedf-250bc8c9958e","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/a06dc2bd-1dfb-11e4-aedf-250bc8c9958e\/","title":{"rendered":"\u2018Gaming commission sued wrong defendant\u2019"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>The Attorney General\u2019s Office has filed two separate motions to dismiss twin lawsuits filed by the Tinian Casino Gaming Commission against Gov. Juan N. Babauta, saying it has sued the wrong defendant, its challenge is moot, and its claims are based on an incorrect interpretation of the CNMI Constitution and its laws.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cThe petition should be dismissed in its entirety,\u201d said assistant attorney general James Livingstone, who is serving as attorney for Babauta. <\/p>\n<p>The commission had filed separate petitions that asked the court to declare that Tinian Local Law 14-1, which was signed into law by Babauta last May 24, is invalid, and that the results of the Nov. 1, 2003 popular initiative caused the adoption of changes to the Casino Act.<\/p>\n<p>The commission, represented by its executive director Esther Hofschneider-Barr, named the governor as respondent in a petition that seeks judicial declaration that would effectively uphold the adoption of the Casino Act amendments through the popular initiative.<\/p>\n<p>The commission said that, relying on the advice of their legal counsel, Elliot A. Sattler, it is reluctant to take any action pursuant to Tinian Local Law No. 14-1 since it could result in civil litigation or criminal prosecution of the commission members \u201cfor breach of their fiduciary duty.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Sattler had said that the Casino Act could only be amended by \u201can act of equal dignity,\u201d specifically through a popular initiative, and not through the passage of a local law.<\/p>\n<p>\u201c[The] local law adopted by the Legislative Delegation\u2026is not an act or law of \u2018equal dignity\u2019 to the Revised Casino Act, but\u2026an \u2018inferior act\u2019 to the\u2026Act, which was adopted pursuant to the constitutional authority of\u2026Article XXI [local initiative],\u201d Sattler said.<\/p>\n<p>In a motion, Livingstone said that the governor is the wrong defendant because he has not taken any position on the matter. In fact, he said that the petitioner cannot point to any actions that the governor has taken with respect to the proposed initiative or how the interpretation that led to the dispute is within his responsibilities.<\/p>\n<p>Besides, it is not the respondent\u2019s responsibility to interpret the laws, as this belongs to the AGO.<\/p>\n<p>In another motion, Livingstone said that the governor \u201chas complete legislative immunity.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>\u201cThe respondent is absolutely and completely immune from suit. He was only sued because he signed Tinian Local Bill 14-1 into law. As signing a bill into law is a legislative function, legislative immunity provides him complete immunity from suit,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n<p>Moreover, he said that Tinian Local Law 14-1 is a lawful and valid law.<\/p>\n<p>Livingstone said that the commission\u2019s counsel insisted that the Casino Act of 1989 could only be changed by local initiative and that laws passed by initiative could only be modified by subsequent amendment, citing cases from Arizona and California.<\/p>\n<p>However, Livingstone said that Sattler did not acknowledge that the constitutions of those states contain provisions that specifically limit the power of the legislature to amend laws enacted by initiative.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cHe also didn\u2019t point out that there was no provision in the NMI Constitution similar to those that exist in Arizona and California,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n<p>The AGO also said that the question of whether or not the initiative petition became law is no longer a live controversy.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cIt is moot. The Tinian legislative delegation enacted [HB 14-1] this past spring. This law is the same as the initiative petition,\u201d Livingstone said.<\/p>\n<p>Further, he said that none of the petitioner\u2019s challenges to Local Law 14-1 withstands scrutiny.<\/p>\n<p>He said that local legislative delegations may amend local laws passed by initiative to the same extent as laws the delegation passes.<\/p>\n<p>Both the local law and the popular initiative would allow amendments to the Casino Act, including the awarding of a casino license to hotels with just 100 rooms instead of the minimum requirement of 300 rooms.<\/p>\n<p>The amendments also sought to reduce the casino license application fee from $200,000 to not less than $5,000, as well as permit and regulate credit wagers in the casino, among others.<\/p>\n<p>In one of the petitions, the commission named as respondents Babauta and members of the Tinian Legislative Delegation\u2014Senate President Joaquin G. Adriano, senators Joseph M. Mendiola and Henry H. San Nicolas, and House Rep. Norman S. Palacios.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The Attorney General\u2019s Office has filed two separate motions to dismiss twin lawsuits filed by the Tinian Casino Gaming Commission against Gov. Juan N. Babauta, saying it has sued the wrong defendant, its challenge is moot, and its claims are based on an incorrect interpretation of the CNMI Constitution and its laws.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[4],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-83580","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-local-news"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/83580","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\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=83580"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/83580\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=83580"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=83580"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=83580"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}