He said Fitial’s planned lawsuit will come at a time when the federal government is asking the CNMI government to actively participate in drafting the implementing rules for U.S. P.L. 110-229.
“Federal officials are currently traveling to Guam/CNMI to consult on the regulations, and the suggestion that their efforts may not be meaningful, coupled with a possible lawsuit, are inconsistent with the cooperative spirit needed to work through these issues,” Wicker told Variety in an e-mail interview.
Fitial said he has retained the U.S. law firm Jenner & Block for his planned lawsuit.
He said the commonwealth intends to seek relief from the anticipated economic injury it will suffer from the federalization of local immigration.
He believes the CNMI will lose its foreign guest workers within five years or by 2014.
Not true, Wicker said.
“Section 701 of the law specifically states the congressional intent to provide a mechanism for the continued use of alien workers, to the extent those workers continue to be necessary to supplement the commonwealth’s resident workforce,” said Wicker.
False
He said while it is true that the CNMI guest worker program will be phased out, its federal counterpart will replace it.
“It is expected that the new regulations will shift most existing CNMI guest workers from the CNMI program to a new federal program, and that this federal program will continue as long as the CNMI needs alien [workers],” Wicker said.
Fitial also claimed that the provisions of the federal law leave “very little room for meaningful negotiation,” but Wicker said this is contradicted by the draft GAO report made available to the governor’s office.
The CNMI, he added, is not being harshly treated.
“The lawsuit would apparently argue that the new law subjects the CNMI to federal labor regulations ‘which are not, and never have been, part of the federal immigration laws.’ Again, this is incorrect,” he said.
He added: “Federal immigration laws currently provide for alien worker visas, and in the 1970s Congress authorized special guest worker visas for use only in the territories. The law’s CNMI-only guest worker program does not set a precedent and it is much less harmful to the CNMI than if federal immigration laws were extended without any special provisions.”
Resolution
The CNMI House of Representatives yesterday debated whether it should support Fitial’s lawsuit that will be funded by his sympathizers in the private sector.
Rep. Stanley T. Torres, R-Saipan, and four other members sponsored House Resolution 16-42 expressing concern about the economic impact of the federalization law in the CNMI.
The resolution also supports the governor’s action in seeking further legal advice before challenging U.S. P.L. 110-229 in federal court.
Rep. Heinz S. Hofschneider, R-Saipan, urged his colleagues to reject the resolution.
He prefers “diplomatic means” and fears the consequences of taking the federal government to court.
“We have a 50-50 chance of winning,” he said. “Even if we win, the court will probably just send [the law] back to the U.S. Congress so it can rewrite it.”
Rep. Diego T. Benavente, R-Saipan and chairman of the House Committee on U.S. and Foreign Relations, said the Fitial administration has no relationship at all with the federal government.
“Why are we (pursuing litigation) when there are other avenues to communicate and negotiate?” he said.
Rep. Joseph Reyes, R-Saipan, for his part, said the lawsuit “is not going to be cheap — we might even go up to the U.S. Supreme Court,” adding that the case could drag on for years.
Rep. Tina Sablan, Ind.-Saipan, said this is not a good time to fight the federal government which continues to provide millions of dollars in assistance to the CNMI.
She also asked the House to probe the legality and appropriateness of having the private sector fund the initial phase of the planned lawsuit against the federal government.
The resolution was later referred to committee “for further review.”
