CNMI: Court Rules 2A Applies to Northern Mariana Islands

Ammoland ^ | 29 March, 2016 | Dean Weingarten

[marktwain]

The U.S. District Court of the Northern Mariana Islands has issued a strong ruling that enforces the Second Amendment in the Commonwealth.  The long running lawsuit filed by David Radich and his wife, Li-Rong, was settled on 28 March, 2016.  The ruling enforces the findings in Heller and McDonald, both of which are referenced.  Here are the primary findings of the Court:

The import ban on handguns and handgun ammunition is unconstitutional,

Refusing to use “family defense” or “self-defense” as a valid reason for issuing a Weapons Identification Card” (WIC) , required for purchasing a firearm, is unconstitutional.

Refusing to issue a WIC to a lawful permanent resident is unconstitutional;

A WIC will be issued to the plaintiffs, if they meet the other requirements, within 30 days;

Costs and fees will be awarded to the plaintiffs;

Any response by the defendants shall be filed by 18 April, 2016.

It is unknown if an appeal will be filed.  Here is the wording of the actual conclusion of the ruling of the Court. From the ruling(pdf):

IV. CONCLUSION

Because the Covenant applies both the Second Amendment and the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution to the CNMI as if it were a state, and it is unconstitutional for a state to ban handguns for self-defense purposes in the home or to restrict handgun possession to citizens but not lawful permanent residents, the Court must grant the Radiches cross-motion for summary judgment as to all counts, and similarly deny the Defendants’ cross-motion for summary judgment in its entirety.

Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiffs’ cross-motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 51) is granted and Defendants’ cross-motion for summary

[marktwain]

We will know if there will be an appeal shortly after 18 April. The Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands falls under the jurisdiction of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. The decision of the Ninth on the en banc hearing of the Peruta case is still pending. If they confirm the three judge panel decision, then the CNMI will have to allow people to carry firearms.

Guam, also under the Ninth, already passed a shall issue law, in part, because of Peruta.

[KC_Lion]

Well, who would have thunk it.

The United States Constitution is valid IN the United States.

Thanks for that Judaical Branch.

[JimRed]

Refusing to use “family defense” or “self-defense” as a valid reason for issuing a Weapons Identification Card” (WIC) , required for purchasing a firearm, is unconstitutional.

What about the obvious fact that ANY requirement for government PERMISSION to obtain, own, carry or lawfully use a firearm is an infringement upon that which "shall not be infringed"? Halfway is better than none, but there's still a long way to go!

[Little Pig]

The Marianas aren’t *in* the US. They’re a possession, so I can see where there might be some gray areas. Ditto the VI, American Samoa etc. I know that the VI currently has fairly strict licensing requirements, even for long guns, so it will be interesting to see if this ruling (assuming it stands) will affect the VI as well.

[KC_Lion]

But the Marianas Islanders are American Citizens, NOT Nationals like American Samoa.

They have the Same birth-rite Citizenship that you and I do.

[Fai Mao]

The CNMI also has unconstitutional property laws.

If you are not Chamorro you can not own property. If you are a Chamorro you can only sell to a Chamorro. No non-Chamorro may own a house, condo, or bit of commercial or agricultural land.

Try saying that you can’t sell property to anyone except a white, non-Jew in the rest of the US. It is the same thing.

[Little Pig]

Citizenship, yes, but not necessarily the same laws and protections.

[Ciexyz]

A number of Chinese nationals use the Northern Marianas for birth tourism to obtain US citizenship for their newborn.

[marktwain]

The CNMI has a covenant that specifically applies the first 9 amendments. The VI was purchased outright from Denmark in 1917.

[marktwain]

The VI laws are blatantly unconstitutional, but I do not know of any court case being filed against them. It would be a good case.

[marktwain]

The VI falls under the Third Circuit, which has issued a ruling hostile to the Second Amendment, claiming that the right to carry a firearm outside the home is not covered by the Second Amendment.