Guam Society of OBGYNs v. Guerrero
What's at Stake
Guam Society of OBGYNs v. Guerrero is a case originally brought by the ÌÇÐÄVlogand local attorneys on Guam challenging a 1990 total ban on abortion that imposes criminal penalties on patients, providers and those who speak about abortion. In August of 1990, a federal district court judge for the District of Guam granted the ACLU’s motion for summary judgment and entered a permanent injunction against the ban. After appeals were exhausted, the case was closed.
Over three decades later, on February 1, 2023, Guam Attorney General Douglas B. Moylan filed a Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(5) motion to vacate the permanent injunction and dismiss the case with prejudice. The ÌÇÐÄVlogand Guam local counsel opposed the motion, on behalf of the only remaining original plaintiff, and proposed intervenors — the only two providers of abortion in Guam, and Guam-based reproductive justice organization Famalao’an Rights.
On March 24th, 2023, a federal district court denied the Attorney General’s request to vacate the permanent injunction. Attorney General Moylan then appealed this decision to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
On April 28, 2025, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued an order dismissing Attorney General Moylan’s appeal as moot, in light of an October 2023 decision by the Guam Supreme Court holding that the ban had been legislatively repealed. As a result, the ban remains permanently enjoined and abortion remains legal in Guam.
Summary
The ÌÇÐÄVlog (ACLU) and attorneys Anita Arriola and Vanessa Williams filed a brief on March 8, 2023 in opposition to Guam Attorney General Douglas Moylan’s request that a federal court lift a decades-old permanent injunction and allow a total abortion ban to take effect. If allowed to take effect, the ban, originally passed in 1990 as Public Law 20-134, would criminalize a patient who has an abortion and physicians who provide abortion care. It would also threaten constitutionally-protected speech about abortion. The law was permanently blocked in a lawsuit filed by the ÌÇÐÄVlogand Anita Arriola in 1990, and has remained so for over 30 years.
The brief submitted to the district court was filed by the ÌÇÐÄVlogand Guam-based attorneys on behalf of three Guam-licensed physicians, including the only two physicians providing abortions to patients in Guam, and Famalao’an Rights, a Guam-based reproductive justice group. On March 24th, 2023, the federal district court denied the AG’s request to vacate the permanent injunction. Attorney General Moylan then appealed this decision to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. This appeal was dismissed by the Ninth Circuit as moot on April 28, 2025, in light of the Guam Supreme Court’s holding in a separate case that the ban had been legislatively repealed during the course of the intervening years. As a result, the ban remains permanently enjoined and abortion remains legal in Guam.
Banning abortion would have had particularly severe consequences for people in Guam, who, under this ban, would have been faced with three untenable scenarios: Carry a pregnancy to term and give birth against their will; make a costly trip and travel several thousand miles each way to obtain abortion outside of Guam, potentially risking criminalization upon their return; or face severe criminal charges because they accessed essential health care in their own community.
In addition to the health risks posed by the ban, the law would have criminalized speech that is squarely protected by the First Amendment, including speech about where abortion is legal, speech counseling patients about abortion as an option, and general advocacy about abortion.
Attorney General Moylan filed his motion to vacate the injunction blocking the ban despite the vocal opposition of Governor Lou Leon Guerrero, who was also a party in the case. Governor Guerrero’s office filed an opposition opposing the revival of P.L. 20-134, and her office filed the separate case in the Guam Supreme Court that resulted in the Guam Supreme Court declaring the abortion ban to have been legislatively repealed.
Legal Documents
-
04/28/2025
Order of Dismissal -
12/09/2024
Appellee Guerrero's Reply to Appellant's Resp. to Jurisdictional Question -
12/09/2024
Appellees Dunlop and Freeman's Resp. to Appellant's Supp. Brief on Mootness -
11/27/2024
Appellant's Resp. to Jurisdictional Question -
12/14/2023
Order Granting Motion to Stay in Part -
10/27/2023
Defendant-Appellees' Answering Brief -
10/27/2023
Plaintiffs-Appellees' Answering Brief -
08/08/2023
Appellant's Opening Brief -
03/24/2023
District Court Order Denying Motion to Vacate Permanent Injunction -
03/22/2023
Defendants' Reply to Response to Motion to Vacate -
03/20/2023
Defendant Lourdes A. Leon Guerrero’s Reply Memorandum In Support Of Motion For Abstention -
03/08/2023
Opposition to Motion to Vacate Permanent Injunction -
03/08/2023
Motion to Intervene -
-
03/08/2023
Memo of P&A re Motion to Intervene -
03/08/2023
Declaration, A. Arriola -
03/08/2023
Declaration, W. Freeman -
03/08/2023
Declaration, S. Raidoo -
03/08/2023
Declaration, B. Kaneshiro -
03/08/2023
Declaration, S. Lorenzo
Guam Society of OBGYNs v. GuerreroLegal DocumentsMemo of P&A re Motion to InterveneDate Filed: 03/08/2023
-
03/08/2023
Date Filed: 12/09/2024
Date Filed: 12/09/2024
Date Filed: 11/27/2024
Date Filed: 12/14/2023
Date Filed: 10/27/2023
Date Filed: 10/27/2023
Date Filed: 03/24/2023
Date Filed: 03/22/2023
Date Filed: 03/20/2023
Date Filed: 03/08/2023
Press Releases
Federal Court Dismisses Attempt to Revive Guam Abortion Ban
U.S. Supreme Declines to Hear Appeal from Guam Supreme Court Ruling in Abortion Case
Federal Court Preserves Abortion Access in Guam
Physicians and Advocates File Opposition To Attorney General’s Request to Enforce Guam’s 1990 Total Abortion Ban