{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\uc1\deff0\stshfdbch0\stshfloch0\stshfhich0\stshfbi0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fcharset0\fprq2{\*\panose 02020603050405020304}Times New Roman{\*\falt Times New Roman};}
{\f112\froman\fcharset0\fprq2{\*\panose 02020502050305020303}Goudy Old Style;}{\f169\fnil\fcharset0\fprq2{\*\panose 00000400000000000000}WP TypographicSymbols;}{\f185\froman\fcharset238\fprq2 Times New Roman CE{\*\falt Times New Roman};}
{\f186\froman\fcharset204\fprq2 Times New Roman Cyr{\*\falt Times New Roman};}{\f188\froman\fcharset161\fprq2 Times New Roman Greek{\*\falt Times New Roman};}{\f189\froman\fcharset162\fprq2 Times New Roman Tur{\*\falt Times New Roman};}
{\f190\froman\fcharset177\fprq2 Times New Roman (Hebrew){\*\falt Times New Roman};}{\f191\froman\fcharset178\fprq2 Times New Roman (Arabic){\*\falt Times New Roman};}{\f192\froman\fcharset186\fprq2 Times New Roman Baltic{\*\falt Times New Roman};}
{\f193\froman\fcharset163\fprq2 Times New Roman (Vietnamese){\*\falt Times New Roman};}}{\colortbl;\red0\green0\blue0;\red0\green0\blue255;\red0\green255\blue255;\red0\green255\blue0;\red255\green0\blue255;\red255\green0\blue0;\red255\green255\blue0;
\red255\green255\blue255;\red0\green0\blue128;\red0\green128\blue128;\red0\green128\blue0;\red128\green0\blue128;\red128\green0\blue0;\red128\green128\blue0;\red128\green128\blue128;\red192\green192\blue192;}{\stylesheet{
\ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext0 Normal;}{\*\cs10 \additive \ssemihidden Default Paragraph Font;}{\*
\ts11\tsrowd\trftsWidthB3\trpaddl108\trpaddr108\trpaddfl3\trpaddft3\trpaddfb3\trpaddfr3\tscellwidthfts0\tsvertalt\tsbrdrt\tsbrdrl\tsbrdrb\tsbrdrr\tsbrdrdgl\tsbrdrdgr\tsbrdrh\tsbrdrv 
\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1024\langfe1024\cgrid\langnp1024\langfenp1024 \snext11 \ssemihidden Normal Table;}{\*\cs15 \additive \sbasedon10 \ssemihidden footnote reference;}{\*\cs16 \additive 
\scaps\fs19 GCA Header;}{\*\cs17 \additive \scaps\fs19 GCA Footer;}}{\*\rsidtbl \rsid9258785\rsid9508377\rsid10046219\rsid11483860\rsid14379528}{\*\generator Microsoft Word 10.0.6764;}{\info{\author lroberto}{\operator blake_r}
{\creatim\yr2005\mo8\dy12\hr9\min1}{\revtim\yr2006\mo3\dy20\hr16\min41}{\version4}{\edmins2}{\nofpages11}{\nofwords2624}{\nofchars14957}{\*\company Superior Court of Guam}{\nofcharsws17546}{\vern16391}}\margl2160\margr2160\margt2606\margb2606 
\widowctrl\ftnbj\aenddoc\notabind\wraptrsp\transmf\noxlattoyen\expshrtn\noultrlspc\dntblnsbdb\nospaceforul\truncatefontheight\subfontbysize\sprsbsp\wpjst\lytprtmet\hyphcaps0\horzdoc\dghspace120\dgvspace120\dghorigin1701\dgvorigin1984\dghshow0\dgvshow3
\jcompress\viewkind4\viewscale100\nolnhtadjtbl\rsidroot9258785 \fet0{\*\ftnsep \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid9258785 \chftnsep 
\par }}{\*\ftnsepc \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid9258785 \chftnsepc 
\par }}{\*\aftnsep \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid9258785 \chftnsep 
\par }}{\*\aftnsepc \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid9258785 \chftnsepc 
\par }}\sectd \sbknone\linex0\headery2606\footery2606\sectdefaultcl\sectrsid9258785\sftnbj {\header \pard\plain \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar
\tx0\tx432\tx864\tx1296\tx1728\tx2160\tx2592\tx3024\tx3456\tx3888\tx4320\tx4752\tx5184\tx5616\tx6048\tx6480\tx6912\tx7344\tx7776\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs16\scaps\f112\fs17\insrsid9258785 24}{
\cs16\scaps\f112\fs17\super\insrsid9258785 th}{\cs16\scaps\f112\fs17\insrsid9258785  G.L. Judgment Reducing 25}{\cs16\scaps\f112\fs17\super\insrsid9258785 th}{\cs16\scaps\f112\fs17\insrsid9258785  G.L./1997 Guam 15/Order of Dismissal
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx0\tx432\tx864\tx1296\tx1728\tx2160\tx2592\tx3024\tx3456\tx3888\tx4320\tx4752\tx5184\tx5616\tx6048\tx6480\tx6912\tx7344\tx7776\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\f112\fs22\insrsid9258785 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\sl-240\slmult0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\f112\fs22\insrsid9258785 
\par }}{\*\pnseclvl1\pnucrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl2\pnucltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl3\pndec\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl4\pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta )}}
{\*\pnseclvl5\pndec\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl6\pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl7\pnlcrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl8
\pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl9\pnlcrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}\pard\plain \qc \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11483860 
\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\b\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF GUAM}{\b\insrsid11483860\charrsid11483860 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11483860 {\insrsid11483860 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11483860 {\b\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 IN RE: REQUEST OF THE TWENTY-FOURTH
\par GUAM LEGISLATURE FOR DECLARATORY
\par JUDGMENT AS TO THE IMPLEMENTATION
\par OF THE INITIATIVE ORDER OF DISMISSAL
\par REDUCING MEMBERS}{\b\insrsid11483860  }{\b\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 OF THE TWENTY-FIFTH
\par GUAM LEGISLATURE}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11483860 {\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11483860 {\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 Supreme Court Case
\par No. CRQ97-001
\par Filed: November 5, 1997
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11483860 {\insrsid11483860 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11483860 {\b\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 Cite as: 1997 Guam 15
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11483860 {\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11483860 {\insrsid10046219 MOTION TO DISMISS}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
\par Argued and Ruled Upon 19 September 1997
\par Agana, Guam}{\insrsid11483860 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11483860 {\insrsid11483860 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11483860 {\b\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 Appearing for Respondent, 
\par Twenty-Fourth Guam Legislature}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
\par DOUGLAS B. MOYLAN
\par Office of the Legislative Counsel
\par Twenty-Fourth Guam Legislature
\par 155 Hesler Street
\par Agana, Guam 96910
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid11483860 Appearing for Respondent,}{\b\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
\par Governor of Guam}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
\par KENNETH D. ORCUTT
\par Assistant Attorney General
\par Suite 2-200E, Judicial Center Bldg.
\par 120 West O}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f169\fs24}}}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 Brien Drive
\par Agana, Guam 96910
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 Attorney for Respondent, 
\par Minority Senators, 
\par Twenty Fourth Guam Legislature}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
\par THERESE M. TERLAJE
\par Barcinas and Terlaje, P.C. 
\par Suite 216, Union Bank Building
\par 194 Hernan Cortes Avenue
\par Agana, Guam 96910
\par }{\insrsid11483860 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11483860 {\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 ____________________}{\insrsid9258785 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11483860 {\insrsid11483860\charrsid11483860 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11483860 {\b\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 ORDER OF DISMISSAL
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11483860 {\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
\par BEFORE: PETER C. SIGUENZA, Chief Justice, JANET HEALY WEEKS, and JOAQUIN C. ARRIOLA, Associate Justices.
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 WEEKS, J.:
\par }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
\par }{\b\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 [1]}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 \tab This matter comes before the Court on Motion of counsel for the 24}{\super\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 th}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
 Guam Legislature to withdraw and dismiss}{\cs15\super\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain \ql \fi720\li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {
\cs15\super\insrsid9258785 \chftn }{\f112\fs20\insrsid9258785 The motion was filed on 12 September 1997 as a Motion to Withdraw, but under both the Supreme Court Rules of Appellate Procedure and 7 GCA }{\f112\fs20\insrsid9258785 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL
 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f169\fs20}}}{\f112\fs20\insrsid9258785  4104, as amended,  it is more appropriately titled a Motion to Dismiss. }}}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860  the Legislature}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f169\fs24}}}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 s Request for Declaratory Judgment (Resolution 97-77) filed on 12 June 1997.}{\insrsid11483860  }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
The Motion to Dismiss was heard on 19 September 1997. Douglas Moylan appeared on behalf of the movant, 24}{\super\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 th}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
 Guam Legislature; Therese Terlaje, counsel for the minority party of the 24}{\super\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 th}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860  Guam Legislature opposed the motion. Assistant Attorney General 
Kenneth Orcutt, representing the Governor, did not object to the motion.}{\insrsid11483860  }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
After hearing the arguments of counsel, the Court issued an oral ruling dismissing the Request for Declaratory Judgment. The Court indicated that this written order setting forth the basis }{\insrsid11483860 for the dismissal would follow.}{
\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
\par 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11483860 {\b\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 JURISDICTION PURSUANT TO 7 GCA }{\b\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f169\fs24}}}{\b\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860  4104}{\b\insrsid9258785 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11483860 {\insrsid11483860\charrsid11483860 
\par }{\b\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 [2]}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 \tab In the Frank G. Lujan Memorial Court Reorganization Ac
t of 1992, the Guam Legislature statutorily vested this Court with authority to hear abstract questions of law, disassociated from a case or controversy then before the courts, where these questions bore on the duties and authority of the other two branch
es of our government. 7 GCA }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f169\fs24}}}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860  4104 (1995).}{\insrsid11483860  }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
As enacted by Public Law 21-147 this provision read as follows:
\par }{\b\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
\par }{\b\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f169\fs24}}}{\b\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860  4104. Governor and Legislature may request declaratory judgments.}{
\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
\par 
\par }\pard \qj \li720\ri432\widctlpar\faauto\rin432\lin720\itap0\pararsid11483860 {\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
The Governor, in writing, or the Legislature, by resolution, may request declaratory judgments from the Supreme Court as to the interpretation of any law, federal or local, lying within the jurisdiction of the courts
 of Guam to decide, and upon any question affecting the powers and duties of the Governor and the operation of the Executive Branch, or of the Legislature, respectively. The declaratory judgments may be issued }{\b\ul\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
only where it is a matter of great public interest and the normal processes of law would cause undue delay}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
. Such declaratory judgments shall not be available to private parties. The Supreme Court shall, pursuant to its rules of procedure, permit interested parties to be heard on the questions presented and shall render its written judgment thereon.}{
\insrsid11483860  }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 (Emphasis added)
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11483860 {\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
\par It is this procedure which was invoked by Resolution 97-77.
\par 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11483860 {\b\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 PROCEDURAL AND FACTUAL HISTORY OF RESOLUTION 97-77}{\b\insrsid9258785 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11483860 {\insrsid11483860\charrsid11483860 
\par }{\b\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 [3]}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 \tab The 23rd Guam Legislature, through Public Law 23-01 (as amended by Publi
c Law 23-99), had submitted an initiative to the voters of Guam which would reduce the size of the Guam Legislature from twenty-one (21) members to fifteen (15).}{\insrsid11483860  }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
In November of 1996 the voters ratified that initiative.}{\insrsid11483860  }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 However, the initiative itself did no
t address the quorum and voting requirements imposed upon the Guam Legislature by Guam law and the Organic Act of Guam.}{\insrsid11483860  }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 There came to light}{\insrsid11483860  }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
an apparent conflict between the adopted laws of the Territory and the provisions of the Organic Act of Guam which relate to Guam Legislatures.
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 [4]}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 \tab On 6 May 1997, pursuant to 7 GCA }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f169\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860  4104,}{\insrsid11483860  }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 the 24}{\super\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 th}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
 Guam Legislature passed Resolution 97-77 which requested a declaratory judgment on several issues of law.}{\insrsid11483860  }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 The Legislature represe
nted that the issues were of great public interest and the normal processes of law would cause undue delay. Specifically, the 24}{\super\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 th}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
 Guam Legislature asked this Court to answer the following questions:}{\insrsid9258785 
\par }{\insrsid11483860\charrsid11483860 
\par }\pard \qj \li720\ri432\widctlpar\faauto\rin432\lin720\itap0\pararsid11483860 {\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 1) How many affirmative votes will be necessary for the
 Twenty-fifth Guam Legislature to pass a Bill? How many of the fifteen (15) members constitutes a quorum?}{\insrsid11483860  }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 Can a quorum consist of more than a majority of the members?
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11483860 {\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
\par }\pard \qj \li720\ri432\widctlpar\faauto\rin432\lin720\itap0\pararsid11483860 {\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 2) Is 2 GCA }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f169\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 2104 in violation of the Organic Act?
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11483860 {\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
\par Resolution 97-77 noted two provisions of law which are in apparent conflict. 48 U.S.C. }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f169\fs24}}}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
 1423b, is a part of the Organic Act of Guam enacted by Congress, which states in relevant part:}{\insrsid9258785 
\par }{\insrsid11483860\charrsid11483860 
\par }\pard \qj \li720\ri432\widctlpar\faauto\rin432\lin720\itap0\pararsid11483860 {\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
The quorum of the Legislature shall consist of eleven of its members. No bill shall become a law unless it shall have been passed at a meeting, at which a quorum was present, by the affirmative vote of a majority of the members present and voting, which v
ote shall be by yeas and nays.}{\insrsid11483860  }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11483860 {\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
\par 2 GCA }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f169\fs24}}}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860  2104 is a law of Guam and reads: }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL
 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f169\fs24}}}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 No bill shall be passed by the Legislature with less than eleven (11) affirmative votes.}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f169\fs24}}}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
\par }{\b\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
\par [5]}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 \tab As the Legislature discerned}{\insrsid11483860  }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
in Resolution 97-77, the earlier provision appears to indicate that the Guam Legislature may act with as few as eleven (11) members present and that a bill may become law based upon the assent of a majority of }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f169\fs24}}}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 those present and voting.}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f169\fs24}}}{\insrsid11483860  }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 For example, if there were only eleven (11) senators present, then only six (6) yea votes would be sufficient to pass a bill.}{\insrsid11483860  }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
Still fewer votes would be necessary if one or more of the eleven (11) member quorum were permitted to abstain.}{\insrsid11483860  }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
An extreme example would be as follows: if there were eleven (11) members present and eight (8) abstained from voting, then it would take only two (2) affirmative votes to pass a measure.}{\cs15\super\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 \chftn {\footnote 
\pard\plain \ql \fi720\li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs15\super\insrsid9258785 \chftn }{\f112\fs20\insrsid9258785 
A corollary issue raised by the Governor relates to the number of votes required to override a gubernatorial veto which is set forth at 48 USC }{\f112\fs20\insrsid9258785 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt
\f169\fs20}}}{\f112\fs20\insrsid9258785 1423i, which requires a two-thirds vote of its members to pass a bill into law over the governor}{\f112\fs20\insrsid9258785 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f169\fs20}}}{
\f112\fs20\insrsid9258785 s veto.  In the case of a 21 member legislature this number would be 14, in a 15 member legislature it would require 10 votes.}}}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860  
\par }{\b\insrsid11483860 
\par }{\b\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 [6]}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 \tab On 12 June 1997 the Resolution was filed with the Supreme Court of Guam, an act which formalized the Legislature}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL
 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f169\fs24}}}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 s request that this Court resolve the legal questions presented.}{\insrsid11483860  }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
Resolution 97-77 was certified by the Chief Justice as appropriate for declaratory judgment after he determined that the issues presented were of great public interest and that the normal processes of law would cause undue delay. 
\par }{\b\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
\par [7]}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 \tab On 15 July 1997, follow
ing certification that the issues were appropriate for consideration, the Chief Justice ordered that all persons, as individuals or in their representative capacities, who wished to be designated as interested parties submit statements supporting such cla
im.}{\insrsid11483860  }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 (}{\i\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 See}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860  Order dated 15 July 1997, CRQ 97-001).}{\insrsid11483860  }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
The notice to interested parties was duly published in the Pacific Daily News. In response, five (5)}{\insrsid11483860  }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 filings for interested party status were received.}{\insrsid11483860  }{
\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 These were the Governor of Guam (represented by the Attor
ney General of Guam), the 24th Guam Legislature (represented by counsel for the Legislative Majority), Senator V.C. Pangelinan, as both an elected Senator and as the representative head of the Legislative Minority, and Senators Elizabeth Barrett-Anderson 
and Mark Forbes on behalf of themselves as duly elected Senators.
\par }{\b\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
\par [8]}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 \tab On 22 August 1997, the Chief Justice issued an order identifying the 24}{\super\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 th}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
 Guam Legislature, the Governor of Guam and Senator Pangelinan, solely in his capacity as the Minority Leader of the 24}{\super\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 th}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
 Guam Legislature, as interested parties and directing that they file briefs.}{\insrsid11483860  }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
Senators Mark Forbes and Elizabeth Barrett Anderson, who sought interested party status based on their positions as elected senators, and Sen. V.C. Pangelinan in his individual senatorial capacity, were disapproved as such.}{\insrsid11483860  }{
\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 On 12 September 1997 the interested parties were informed that the Request for Declaratory Judgment was scheduled to be heard on 19 September 1997.
\par 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11483860 {\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 P}{\b\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 ROCEDURAL AND FACTUAL HISTORY OF RESOLUTION 97-155 
\par AND SUBSTITUTE BILL 220}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11483860 {\b\insrsid11483860 
\par }{\b\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 [9]}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 \tab On 12 September 1997, Resolution Number 97-155, principally authored by Senators Elizabeth Barrett-Anderson, Mark Forbes and F.B. Aguon, Jr., was adopted by the 24}{
\super\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 th}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860  Guam Legislature.}{\insrsid11483860  }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 Resolution 97-155 sought the withdrawal of 
the Request for Declaratory Judgment transmitted in Resolution 97-77.}{\insrsid11483860  }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
The newer Resolution stated that the issues previously addressed to the Court were matters that the Legislature could deal with internally and which, if left in the hands of the Supreme Court, might result in a determination which had an }{
\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f169\fs24}}}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 unintended and undesirable}{\insrsid11483860  }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 impact}{
\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f169\fs24}}}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860  for the 24th Guam Legislature. The Legislature further noted that the Request fo
r Declaratory Judgment had been premature because remedial legislation, both at the federal and local level, could be obtained before the convening of the 25}{\super\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 th}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860  Guam Legislature.}{
\cs15\super\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain \ql \fi720\li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs15\super\insrsid9258785 \chftn }{\f112\fs20\insrsid9258785 
The Legislative Couns
el filed with the Court a copy of Resolution No.97-37, which directed the submission to Congress of a proposed amendment to the Organic Act. This proposal called for the legislative quorum to be defined as a majority of the legislators and the number of v
otes required to pass Guam}{\f112\fs20\insrsid9258785 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f169\fs20}}}{\f112\fs20\insrsid9258785 s laws to be that set by Guam lawmakers. }}}{\insrsid11483860  }{
\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 Counsel for the Legislature attached Resolution 97-155 to a Motion to Withdraw CRQ 97-001 which was then filed on 12 September 1997.}{\insrsid11483860  }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
\par }{\b\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
\par [10]}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 \tab On 
15 September 1997, four days before the oral arguments for the Motion to Dismiss the Request for Declaratory Judgment and the oral arguments addressing the Request for Declaratory Judgment itself, the Guam Legislature considered and passed Substitute Bill
 220.}{\insrsid11483860  }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 Substitute Bill 220, although deemed an appropriations bill, included a section 3 which amended 7 GCA }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f169\fs24}}}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860  4104}{\cs15\super\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain \ql \fi720\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 
{\cs15\super\insrsid9258785 \chftn }{\insrsid9258785  }{\f112\fs20\insrsid9258785 The amended portion of 7 GCA }{\f112\fs20\insrsid9258785 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f169\fs20}}}{\f112\fs20\insrsid9258785 
 4104, now reads as follows:  
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\f112\fs20\insrsid9258785 
\par }\pard \ql \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0 {\f112\fs20\insrsid9258785 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f169\fs20}}}{\f112\fs20\insrsid9258785 
Upon a writing, or resolution in the case of the Guam Legislature, by the party submitting the request for the declaratory judgment that the party wishes the Supreme Court to dismiss its petition for d
eclaratory judgment, the Supreme Court shall no longer have jurisdiction and shall dismiss without prejudice the declaratory judgment case, provided that the request is filed with the Supreme Court at any time before the Court renders its written decision
.}{\f112\fs20\insrsid9258785 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f169\fs20}}}{\f112\insrsid9258785 
\par }}}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860  to cause the loss of jurisdiction over Requests for Declaratory Judgment where (for purposes of a request from the Guam Legislature) the Legislat
ure adopts a resolution requesting dismissal. The original version of Bill 220 was an appropriations bill for a public works project involving road construction in Talofofo.}{\cs15\super\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain 
\ql \fi720\li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs15\super\insrsid9258785 \chftn }{\f112\fs20\insrsid9258785 
Bill 220 was reported out of the Committee on Finance and Taxation after a hearin
g on 25 June 1997.  Section 3 of Substitute Bill 220 was never given a public hearing.  The committee report for Substitute Bill 220 failed to discuss, at all, the intent of the committee in inserting Section 3 relating to the amendment of 7 GCA }{
\f112\fs20\insrsid9258785 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f169\fs20}}}{\f112\fs20\insrsid9258785  4104.}{\f112\insrsid9258785   }{\f112\fs20\insrsid9258785 
The jurisdiction-stripping provision was introduced, considered and passed on the same day without public notice, hearing or input.}}}{\insrsid11483860  }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
Section 3 of Substitute Bill 220 was considered and approved by the Legislature without a public hearing.
\par 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11483860 {\b\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 DISCUSSION}{\b\insrsid9258785 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11483860 {\insrsid11483860\charrsid11483860 
\par }{\b\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 [11]}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 \tab The effect of the new law providing for a procedure to remove the Court}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f169\fs24}}}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 s jurisdiction (Guam Pub. L. No. 24-61(1997)) on the already pending Request for Declaratory Judgment was not absolutely clear.}{\insrsid11483860  }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
Public Law 24-61 was not made expressly retroactive.}{\insrsid11483860  }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
Also, even if the public law were found to be retroactive, would the new law require dismissal of a Request for Declaratory Judgment where the Resolution requesting Dismissal (e.g., Resolution 97-155)}{\insrsid11483860  }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
preceded the effective date of the statute?}{\cs15\super\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain \ql \fi720\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {
\cs15\super\insrsid9258785 \chftn }{\f112\fs20\insrsid9258785 It is not apparent that, at the time the Resolution seeking withdrawal was entertained, that those voting upon it imagined that it might be given the force of law by a subsequent st
atutory provision.}{\f112\insrsid9258785 
\par }}}{\insrsid11483860  }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
\par }{\b\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
\par [12]}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 \tab This Court has already determined that the issues presented are of great public interest and that the failure to address these concerns here and now would result in undue delay that may prejudice 
the public interest. Therefore, we abandon our consideration of the issues only if it is clear in law that we are compelled to do so.
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 [13]}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 \tab The issue now before the Court is whether, despite the absence of a retroactivity provision, the Guam Legislature in
tended that Public Law 24-61 and Resolution 97-155 operate in conjunction to compel the dismissal of CRQ 97-001. If the Guam Legislature intended the amendment to apply retroactively to the present matter, we must, regardless of our concern for resolving 
the important legal questions before us, comply with that mandate. Judicial officers are limited to considering only those questions which are properly before them under the relevant jurisdictional provisions, be they statutory in nature, as in 7 GCA }{
\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f169\fs24}}}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860  4104, or organic or constitutional in origin, as in 48 U.S.C. }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f169\fs24}}}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860  1424-3(a) and (d).}{\cs15\super\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain 
\ql \fi720\li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs15\super\insrsid9258785 \chftn }{\f112\fs20\insrsid9258785 A Court}{\f112\fs20\insrsid9258785 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f169\fs20}}}{\f112\fs20\insrsid9258785 s constitutional or Organic Act jurisdiction is not so easily compromised by local legislation.}}}{\insrsid11483860  }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 [14]}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 \tab A hallmark of judicial integrity is the discipline to exercise only that authority which the Court inherently, statutorily or constitutionally possesses.}{\insrsid11483860  }
{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 As we noted in }{\i\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 Taisipic v. Marion}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 , 1996 Guam 9, }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f169\fs24}}}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860  33, this Court is reluctant to allow the Judiciary to intrude upon the functions of the other branches.}{\insrsid11483860  }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 Therefore, this Court}{
\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f169\fs24}}}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
s exercise of statutory jurisdiction could not be justified solely on the basis, for example, that it is necessary to determine whether the 24}{\super\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 th}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
 Guam Legislature is intentionally or unintentionally misapplying its own powers under the Organic Act, especially where other, albeit less expeditious, remedies of law exist.}{\cs15\super\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain 
\ql \fi720\li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs15\super\insrsid9258785 \chftn }{\f112\fs20\insrsid9258785 If this Court}{\f112\fs20\insrsid9258785 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f169\fs20}}}{\f112\fs20\insrsid9258785 s review of the Request for Declaratory Judgment were the only vehicle for addressing these issues, the Court might be boun
d to retain jurisdiction at this time.  Such is not the case.}}}{\insrsid9258785 
\par }{\insrsid11483860\charrsid11483860 
\par }{\b\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 [15]}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 \tab We turn first to the issue of whether the Guam Legislature intended Public Law 24-61, to be retroactive in effect.}{\cs15\super\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 \chftn 
{\footnote \pard\plain \ql \fi720\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs15\super\insrsid9258785 \chftn }{\f112\fs20\insrsid9258785 
Counsel for the 24th Guam Legislature, in filing a supplement to his Motion to Dismiss on 18 September 1997 commented on Public Law 24-61 and acknowledged that the amendment has only forward application.  He indicated in that filing that it took effect at
 midnight on 17 September 1997.  Counsel later argued that section 3 was intended to be retroactive.
\par }}}{\insrsid11483860  }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 As a rule, a statute is presumed to have only prospective effect unless it is made expressly retroactive or is retroactive by }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f169\fs24}}}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 necessary implication.}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f169\fs24}}}{\insrsid11483860  }{
\i\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 Nelson v. Ada,}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860  878 F.2d 277, 280 (9}{\super\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 th}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
 Cir.1989). Guam also has a statutory provision which requires an express declaration of retroactivity. 1 GCA }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f169\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860  702 reads }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f169\fs24}}}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
No part of this Code is retroactive, unless expressly so declared.}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f169\fs24}}}{\insrsid11483860  }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
In the absence of a retroactivity clause the legislative intent is looked to for guidance as to whether retrospective impact is otherwise specifically directed or is }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f169\fs24}}}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 necessary to accomplish the purposes for which the statute was enacted.}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f169\fs24}}}{\insrsid11483860  }{\i\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 McBarron v. Kimball}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 , 26 Cal.Rptr. 379, 380 (Cal. Ct. App. 1962); }{\i\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 State of Hawaii v. Von Geldern}{
\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 , 638 P.2d 319, 322 (Haw. 1981)(stating lack of a retroactivity provision not determinative of effect).
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 [16]}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 \tab In the present matter, we must conclude that i
t is necessarily implied that the Legislature intended to preclude the Court from determining the issues before us. While no express retroactivity provision exists within Public Law 24-61, the pre-enactment, enactment and post-enactment history collective
ly infer that the primary purpose of Public Law 24-61 was to prevent this Court from determining the merits of the pending Request for Declaratory Judgment}{\insrsid11483860 .}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
\par }{\b\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
\par [17]}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 \tab The following facts are significant.}{\insrsid11483860  }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 There is before this Court only one pending Request for D
eclaratory Judgment, CRQ97-001 and it is the focus of the present Motion for Dismissal.}{\insrsid11483860  }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
Resolution 97-155 and Public Law 21-64 were passed quickly and in anticipation of the 19 September 1997 hearing on the merits of the Request.}{\insrsid11483860  }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
Furthermore, as Resolution 97-155 indicates, the Legislature had a concern that our determination of the issues would have an }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f169\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 unfortunate and unintended impact}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f169\fs24}}}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860  on the
 operations of the present legislature. While this language is somewhat cryptic, oral arguments revealed the particular concern being addressed. Counsel for the Legislature hypothesized that a court ruling which strikes 2 GCA }{
\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f169\fs24}}}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860  2104 in favor of Organic Act provisions, would have the unintended consequence of subjecting the }{
\ul\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 current}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860  legislature to the requirements imposed by the Organic Act of Guam.}{\insrsid11483860  }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 Applying}{\insrsid11483860  }{
\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 Public Law 24-61 to the present matter certainly avoids any}{\insrsid11483860  }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f169\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 unfortunate and unintended impact.}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f169\fs24}}}{\insrsid11483860  }{\i\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 See}{
\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860  }{\i\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 supra}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860  note 2 and accompanying text.}{\insrsid11483860  }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 [18]}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 \tab Also quite compelling is the manner in which 7 GCA }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f169\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860  4104 was amended.}{\insrsid11483860  }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
There was a haste in passing Substitute Bill 220 which evidences the fact that the purpose of the legislation was to stop our consideration of this pending matter.}{\insrsid11483860  }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
Substitute Bill 220 was reported out of committee by the Committee on Finance and Taxation on 12 September 1997, as an amendment to 7 GCA }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f169\fs24}}}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860  4104 which never received a public hearing.}{\insrsid11483860  }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 It}{\insrsid11483860  }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
was reported out on the same day that Resolution 97-155 was passed by the 24}{\super\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 th}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860  Guam 
Legislature, and later, on that same day, legal counsel for the Legislature filed a motion to dismiss the Request for Declaratory Judgment.}{\insrsid11483860  }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
Finally, on 15 September 1997, the Legislature heard Substitute Bill 220 and passed it through second and third readings in a matter of hours.
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 [19]}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 \tab Thus, before}{\insrsid11483860  }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
passage of Public Law 24-61, it was a matter within the discretion of this Court as to whether the Request for Declaratory Judgment would be dismissed. As with any Motion to Dismiss, the Court could weigh the a
rguments of the parties as to the propriety of dismissal.}{\insrsid11483860  }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
But on 15 September 1997, Public Law 24-61 halted the decision-making process of this Court by eliminating any judicial discretion. It forced the singular and intended result, dismissal of CRQ97-001.
\par }{\b\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
\par [20]}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 \tab 
The neglect of the Legislature in failing to provide for express retroactivity in the body of Substitute Bill 220, will not preclude a retroactive operation where the purpose of the statute is abundantly clear. Such oversight is easily explainable 
in the present instance, given the rush to avoid judgment demonstrated by the Legislature}{\insrsid11483860  }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 in hearing, debating and voting upon Substitute Bill 220. 
\par }{\b\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
\par [21]}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 \tab  Furthermore, it is evident that when Public Law 24-61 was passed, the Legislature knew that Resoluti
on 97-155 had already been adopted and had intended that such resolution compel dismissal. When the amendment to the law was debated during second reading, a senator questioned the germaneness of the amendment to 7 GCA }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f169\fs24}}}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
 4104 as a supplement to the 1998 Budget Bill and remarked that the effect of section 3 of Substitute Bill 220 would be to make Resolution}{\insrsid11483860  }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 97-155 law.}{\insrsid11483860  }{
\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 This Court finds that Resolution 97-155 reflects the current intent of the Legislature that the Supreme Court not rule on the merits of CRQ 97-001 and that such intent was ratified by the passage of Public Law 24-61. 

\par }{\b\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
\par [22]}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 \tab Thus, the legislative history, including the sequence and timing of all events, the players, the apparent motives, and the segue from Resolution 97-155 to Public Law 24-61 }{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f169\fs24}}}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860  3, persuades this Court that despite the omission of a retroactivity clause, Public Law 24-6's amending of 7 GCA }{
\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f169\fs24}}}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860  4104 was specifically intended to apply to the Supreme Court}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f169\fs24}}}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 s jurisdiction in CRQ97-001.
\par }{\b\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
\par [23]}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 \tab Because this Court has ackn
owledged the importance of these issues to the people of Guam, and despite the spectre of once again marshaling its resources of time and judicial priorities to address these issues only to be informed of a Legislative change of mind, this Court grants th
e dismissal without prejudice. We shall respect the limits of our authority as a court, and as a branch of Guam}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f169\fs24}}}{
\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 s government.}{\insrsid9258785 
\par }{\b\insrsid11483860\charrsid11483860 
\par }{\b\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 SO ORDERED:}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
\par 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11483860 {\b\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 JANET HEALY WEEKS
\par Associate Justice
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11483860 {\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11483860 {\b\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 PETER C. SIGUENZA
\par Chief Justice}{\insrsid9258785\charrsid11483860 
\par ____________}{\insrsid11483860 
\par }}