Embedded Files
5/29/2025—The CNMI Supreme Court last May 28 heard oral arguments on a certified question from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in a case that could have far-reaching implications for retirees in the CNMI.
The case centers on Rosa A. Camacho, a Class II retiree and member of the NMI Settlement Fund, who is suing the CNMI government and the Fund to claim several years' worth of cost-of-living adjustments, or COLA.
Camacho argues that these adjustments are protected under the CNMI Constitution and cannot be legally reduced or eliminated.
In an over hourlong session at the Supreme Court courtroom in Guma Hustisia, three visiting justices—Guam Supreme Court Chief Justice Robert J. Torres, Guam Supreme Court Associate Justice F. Philip Carbullido, and Hawaii Supreme Court Associate Justice Sabrina S. McKenna—presided over the case. Carbullido joined the panel electronically.
Camacho’s attorney, Jeanne Rayphand, contended that the COLA was an “accrued benefit” under Public Law 6-17 and Article III, Section 20(a) of the NMI Constitution.
“Our position is that COLA was an accrued benefit that cannot be diminished or impaired,” she told Marianas Press after the hearing back at her office at the Northern Marianas Protection and Advocacy Systems, Inc. in Susupe. “The retirees have not received COLA since 2010, and we say they’re entitled to it.”
Rayphand said the judges were deeply engaged and asked detailed questions throughout the hearing. “They were very thorough, and I’m hoping for the best,” she said. “The certified question is: Did Public Law 6-17 grant an accrued benefit of COLA to Class II retirees?”
The other side—represented by Settlement Fund attorneys Patrick Civille and Nicole Torres-Ripple—argued that COLA was not a protected benefit under the current system. Civille emphasized that the original Retirement Fund has since been dissolved, and the Settlement Fund operates as a separate entity.
“The Retirement Fund essentially is dead,” Civille said in a post-hearing interview. “I think it has 14 people in it. The Settlement Fund is not part of the Retirement Fund—it’s a separate entity, a separate fund.”
Civille warned that a ruling in favor of Camacho could result in a massive unfunded liability for the Settlement Fund. “We expect it will be $10 million or larger,” he said. “It doesn’t come out to that much per person, obviously, but it makes a difference… and we don’t know who would pay that.”
He added that while the Fund is in good shape for now—thanks in part to consistent government contributions—any new obligation could introduce uncertainty. “So many things can happen. We don’t like that kind of uncertainty. We don’t want our members to have that kind of uncertainty.”
The certified question posed by the Ninth Circuit asks whether Public Law 6-17, which established the CNMI retirement system, granted an accrued COLA benefit that is protected under the NMI Constitution. The answer could affect thousands of retirees and the future stability of the Fund.
Also present at the hearing were attorneys, court staff, and members of the public. No date was set for when a ruling would be issued, but both sides acknowledged that the court would likely take some time to deliberate.
“It sounds like the justices have a lot to talk over, and I think they will designate someone to draft an opinion and probably circulate that, so that takes some time, but I'm sure they'll be reasonably prompt. “
Asked if he was satisfied with the arguments he presented at the hearing, he said, “You know the old saying, there's three kinds of arguments, right? The one you prepare, the one you give, and then after the fact, the one you wish you would have given.”
Civille added the justices were very generous in letting both sides to present their arguments.
Rayphand agreed, saying she felt confident that the justices had taken the matter seriously. “If they answer it directly, it shouldn’t take too long,” she said about the timeline on a decision for the certified question.
By Mark Rabago
Report abuse