Certified question to court on legality of local casino bill mulled

Some key Saipan lawmakers are considering submitting a certified question to the court to determine whether a local bill legalizing casino gambling on Saipan is constitutional or not, a move that the Senate leadership may also “consider” jointly with the delegation “after the bill passes.”

This, as Saipan and Northern Islands Legislative Delegation’s Committees on Judiciary and Governmental Operations and Ways and Means wrapped up six public hearings on House Local Bill 17-44 on Monday night at the Pedro P. Tenorio Multi-Purpose Center.

The last one didn’t draw a large crowd but was larger than the previous five hearings. Of the 12 who testified on Monday night, six were against the casino bill, four were in support of it, and two were neutral.

Rep. Ray Tebuteb (R-Saipan), chairman of the Saipan and Northern Islands Legislative Delegation, said yesterday that the lingering concerns raised by members of the public as well as the Senate on the bill’s constitutionality can only be resolved by the court.

He said resorting to lawsuit will be costly and time-consuming, so he considers submission of a certified question and hopes that delegation members will agree to it.

The Senate leadership indicated that it will bring the matter to court once the casino bill passes the delegation.

Rep. Ray Yumul (R-Saipan), chairman of the delegation’s Ways and Means Committee, said he’s also been asked by some members to consider a certified question to court.

“If there’s no objection, I will suggest that the question be posed to the court,” he said.

But he said lawmakers are in a peculiar situation because most certified questions are submitted by the House and Senate; for the local casino bill, the question may have to be posed jointly by the Saipan delegation and the Senate.

Senate President Paul Manglona (Ind-Rota), in a separate interview yesterday, said it may be a waste of time to be thinking about submitting a certified question when the casino bill has not even been acted on by the delegation.

But he said he will “seriously consider” joining the delegation in submitting a certified question to court “after the casino bill passes” the House.

He reiterated that the Senate will take the delegation to court if and when it passes the bill—and not after the governor acts on it.

Rep. Joseph Palacios (R-Saipan), chairman of the Saipan delegation’s JGO Committee, said submitting a certified question will be a good option rather than having a lawsuit filed after the bill is passed.

But Palacios said he had already brought this up with the chief justice, who he said did not want to comment on the bill after the Senate leadership had already made public its intention of bringing the matter to court when the delegation passed the measure.

At this time, however, the delegation is not expected to act soon on Rep. Stanley Torres’ (Ind-Saipan) HLB 17-44 because the two committees have yet to submit a report on the bill.

Palacios and Yumul said the need time to compile and transcribe the comments received during the May 31 to June 13 public hearings. Yumul said a report may be ready in early August.