GUAM'S ABORTION DISCOMBOBULATION

By Tim Rohr

The Belle's Law issue is such a discombobulated mess that I'm having a difficult time organizing my thoughts into a coherent post about what is going on given the recent denial by SCOTUS of AG Moylan's writ of certiorari.* So I'm just going to do a stream of consciousness for this one.

* A writ of certiorari orders a lower court to deliver its record in a case so that the higher court may review it.

For starters, there is no reason for any of this court mess if the Legislature would just do its job. The problem is that the Legislature left Belle's Law on the books 30 years ago after the law was enjoined. If it was enjoined because it violated Roe v Wade at the time, and it did, then it should have been immediately repealed. But instead, the lazy Legislature left it there.

And today, the Legislature is just as lazy. There is no reason to leave the law on the books and it could be repealed with a one sentence bill. But it seems no one has thought to do that, so we've been spending tens, if not hundreds of thousands of dollars - by now, and an untold amount of time, batting this thing around in the courts. 

Even now, with the denial from SCOTUS, no one, not even the baby-blood-thirsty governor is saying "legislate the law off the books," instead they prefer to yell at AG Moylan and tell him to shut up and sit down - which of course, the governor and her culture-of-death crew viciously enjoy.

Another discombobulation is that the denial by SCOTUS did NOT have anything to do with Belle's Law or even abortion. It had to do with whether or not the Guam Supreme Court had the authority to issue a declaratory judgment. Moylan argued that it didn't. And I argued the same in GHOSTS THAT SLAY.

However, if you listen to the governor, Jayne, and the ACLU - and the media isn't helping much, you'd think that SCOTUS handed down a decision as momentous as Roe v Wade. And of course, the pro-aborts are purposely playing it that way given that few understand what is really going on, and our local Catholic Church - via its Vicar General -  can only say it is "saddened." 

In fact, there's nothing to be sad about, and everything to bet bucked up about. (Someone tell "the Church.") The case that matters is still very much alive and this is AG Moylan's appeal which lies before the 9th Circuit. This is an appeal of the local District Court's decision to deny Moylan's motion to dissolve the 1990 injunction on Belle's Law.

The 9th Circuit has already made one decision in an abortion related matter that was not in the pro-aborts favor. And maybe this is why Lou, Jayne, and the ACLU are so rabid about shutting Moylan down ASAP.

Meanwhile, it's no surprise how the pro-aborts are playing the SCOTUS thing. Lies and deception are their modus operandi. But even though they play us for stupid, it doesn't mean that we have to be. 

Another matter

Another matter I've been meaning to address is the Guam Supreme Court's opinion (that's all it was: an opinion - not a decision) that Belle's Law had been repealed by implication. The Post reports it here:

By the end of October 2023, the Guam Supreme Court ruled that P.L. 20-134 no longer had any effect on Guam, since it was repealed by implication through subsequent laws allowing for and regulating abortion.

I was one of two amici who argued before the Guam Supreme Court in July 2023 against the governor's position that Belle's Law had been repealed by implication or was void ab initio (here and here). 

The Court ended up opining that Belle's Law had been repealed by implication due to the presence of four laws limiting abortion that had been enacted into law since Belle's Law, but, due to the strictures of Roe, still permitted abortion: The Partial-Birth Abortion Ban (2009), Parental Consent for Minors (2011), Informed Consent for Abortion (2012), and the Abortion Reporting Law (2015).

What's so ironic is that The Esperansa Project, which included myself and a few friends, was the main driver behind all four laws. In fact, over a period of eight years, we had successfully guided eight bills limiting abortion into the Guam Code. Under Roe, attempting to ban abortion outright was futile, so we did what many other states had already done, wrote and shepherded bills which limited abortion to the fullest extent of the law under Roe. 

Yet, here we were in 2023, having our own legislation used against us to support the governor's campaign for death in the womb. 

On a personal note, I can't help but think that one of the Justices sort of knew my role in all that because he spent several pages functionally attacking me in his Concurring Opinion. Given that I was only an amicus at the hearing, and a rather poor one at that, I was surprised to see that I took up so much space in the final opinion. 

End of stream of consciousness.