PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 116-24.
Congressional Research Service
Version 49 · Public Law · Jun 25, 2019
Northern Mariana Islands Long-Term Legal Residents Relief Act
This bill grants Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) Resident status to certain aliens who have resided continuously and lawfully in the CNMI since November 28, 2009. An individual with such status shall be (1) authorized to work in the CNMI; (2) issued travel documentation; and (3) inadmissible to the United States at any port of entry outside of the CNMI, with the exception of Guam in certain instances.
To qualify for CNMI Resident status, an alien must meet various requirements, such as having (1) been lawfully present in the CNMI on the date of this bill's enactment or on December 31, 2018; and (2) resided continuously and lawfully in CNMI from November 28, 2009, through this bill's enactment.
People & committees
Del. Sablan, Gregorio Kilili Camacho [D-MP-At Large] · D–MP
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 116-24.
Became Public Law No: 116-24.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate without amendment by Voice Vote. (consideration: CR S4195)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Voice Vote.(consideration: CR S4195)
Received in the Senate, read twice.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H4201-4202)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H4201-4202)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 559.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H4201-4203)
Mr. Case moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Immigration and Citizenship.
Referred to the Committee on Natural Resources, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Natural Resources, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 5, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.559 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.559 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.559 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.559 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.