During his press conference last week, Gov. Benigno R. Fitial refused to say if he would appeal the case should the judge dismiss the lawsuit, adding that he would wait for the written order before making a public statement.
During Thursday’s hearing of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, the judge ordered to place “under advisement” the CNMI’s motion for a preliminary order as well as that of the U.S. Department of Justice’s motion to dismiss the lawsuit.
This means the judge will review the briefs from both parties as well as those from the amicus curiae before issuing a decision.
Human rights lawyer Bruce L. Jorgensen, who was at the hearing, said the judge made important inquiries.
The judge asked why the lawsuit was filed by a private law firm instead of the CNMI attorney general.
The lawsuit seeks a declaratory judgment that the U.S. law federalizing the islands’ immigration system is unlawful because it violates the CNMI’s right to self-government under its Covenant with the U.S.
The U.S. Department of Justice also noted that the CNMI AG did not file the governor’s lawsuit.
“Judge Friedman discussed the concern, raised by the U.S., that so far neither the CNMI’s acting attorney general nor any AG-employed attorney has either signed any pleadings formally appeared in the proceeding,” said Jorgensen.
“And the seemingly abject lack of rational explanation in this regard by the CNMI’s high-paid-Washington, D.C. lawyers…did little to dispel questions and, more likely, raised further questions, in the court’s mind,” he added.
David DeBruin of the law firm Jenner & Block argued for the CNMI with Howard P. Willens, the governor’s special legal counsel, who is also licensed to practice in Washington, D.C.
Theodore Atkinson argued for the U.S. Departments of Homeland Security and Labor. Three other federal government lawyers assisted him.
A statement from the governor’s office said Willens “was well pleased with all of the commonwealth’s briefs filed with the court, and he was especially pleased with the way the oral argument went.”
“The commonwealth’s claims have been explained to the court fully and fairly, as Section 903 of the Covenant provides,” it said.
DeBruin talked about the history of the Northern Marianas and the reasons why the Covenant negotiators insisted on the right of local self-government.
He noted the hardships the commonwealth will face if two-thirds of its nonresident workforce and one-third of its small population are subject to deportation and discussed at length the legal support for the commonwealth’s position that all laws passed by Congress must respect the commonwealth’s self-government rights.
Atkinson, on the other hand, argued that the commonwealth has no standing to bring the action because all the harms from the law are just speculative.
He further argued that the federal government might enact entirely benevolent regulations that would ameliorate all of the problems with which the commonwealth was concerned.
