Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
House adopts resolution criticizing judge’s conduct in Boost contempt case, urges investigations; vote 14–3
Loading...
Summary
The House adopted House Resolution 24-4 objecting to the acquittal of a contempt charge in the Boost investigation, urged executive and federal prosecutors to examine related alleged crimes, and called for review of a judge's courtroom remarks; the measure passed 14–3 after heated debate.
SAIPAN — The House of Representatives adopted House Resolution 24-4 on Jan. 13, a measure that objects to the acquittal of Shane Blanco Villanueva on a legislative-contempt charge in criminal case 24-0028, urges the Commonwealth attorney general and the U.S. Attorney to investigate alleged crimes connected to the Boost program, and asks the judiciary and the CNMI Bar Association to review Judge Kenneth L. Govendo’s in-court comments.
The floor leader introduced the resolution and the House engaged in extended debate before a recorded vote. Representative Roy Adep announced he would oppose the resolution, saying the courts had already adjudicated the matter and that further legislative action risked using public resources unnecessarily. Representative Aquino also said he would vote no, citing respect for the judicial ruling and the prosecutorial discretion of the attorney general.
Supporters said the resolution defends the legislature’s oversight role and raised concerns that the court’s ruling limited the panel’s ability to compel testimony in future probes. Representative Ralph Hummel argued the case raised a separate question about the scope of legislative contempt versus contempt of court and said the legislature’s investigatory powers deserved protection. Representative Fatao and others described the judge’s remarks and conduct recounted on the record as undermining public confidence in judicial impartiality.
During debate the floor leader played audio excerpts from the Jan. 29 court proceeding in criminal case 24-0028. In the recording, the judge explained his application of Hoffman v. United States and said he found Villanueva’s invocation of the Fifth Amendment reasonable under the circumstances and stated, “I find Mr. Villanueva not guilty of contempt of the legislature.” After the audio, backers urged passage, saying the resolution responds to comments by a sitting judge and seeks review of conduct that some members described as biased.
On a roll call, 14 members voted yes and 3 voted no; House Resolution 24-4 was adopted. Supporters said they expected the resolution to prompt review by the attorney general and the bar association; opponents said the matter was now in the courts and in prosecutorial discretion, and cautioned against perceived legislative interference with judicial independence.
Why it matters: The resolution addresses separation-of-powers questions and the legislature’s authority to conduct oversight and hold witnesses accountable. Supporters framed the measure as protecting legislative investigatory authority; opponents said the courts had resolved the criminal charge and urged deference to judicial and prosecutorial processes.
Ending: With the resolution adopted, clerks recorded the vote and lawmakers signaled they expect follow-up from the attorney general and the CNMI Bar Association on whether any disciplinary or prosecutorial steps will follow.
