United States v. Xiaoying Tang Dowai, No. 14-10277 (9th Cir. 2016)
Annotate this CaseDefendant, a native of China, was convicted of visa fraud, making a false statement, and conspiracy to defraud the United States. On appeal, defendant argues that she has been deprived of her constitutional right to an independent federal judiciary because the Northern Mariana Islands District Court (NMI District Court) is not properly established under the Constitution. The court concluded that the NMI District Court was established by Congress pursuant to its authority under Article IV of the Constitution; Congress clearly intended that the NMI District Court have jurisdiction over criminal cases; the language of 48 U.S.C. 1821 and 1822 clearly shows that Congress intentionally created the NMI District Court and gave it jurisdiction over criminal prosecutions; Congress did so based on the authority conferred on it by Article IV, Section 3, Clause 2 of the Constitution; and defendant's challenge to the NMI District Court’s authority fails completely in light of Supreme Court precedent that has rejected challenges similar to hers. The court rejected defendant's remaining challenges and affirmed the conviction.
Court Description: Criminal Law. The panel affirmed convictions in a case in which the defendant asserted that she was deprived of her constitutional right to an independent judiciary because the Northern Mariana Islands District Court – which was created by statute and whose judges lack the secure tenure required by Article III of the Constitution – is not properly established under the Constitution. The panel explained that the language of 48 U.S.C. §§ 1821 and 1822 shows that Congress intentionally created the NMI District Court and gave it criminal jurisdiction over criminal prosecutions; that Congress did so based on the authority conferred on it by Article IV, Section 3, Clause 2 of the Constitution; and that this may well be sufficient to defeat the defendant’s heavy burden of showing that Congress exceeded its constitutional bounds. The panel wrote that the defendant’s challenge to the NMI District Court’s authority fails completely in light of Supreme Court precedent that has rejected challenges similar to hers. The panel rejected the defendant’s other challenges to her conviction in a memorandum disposition. UNITED STATES V. DOWAI 3
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.