The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit vacated a preliminary injunction that enjoined the enforcement of a Guam law requiring in-person consultations before obtaining an abortion. The case is an appeal from the US District Court for the District of Guam.

Circuit Judge Kenneth K. Lee authored the unanimous opinion of the three-judge panel. The court ruled that the law was valid under rational basis review.

Under rational basis review, a court will uphold a law as constitutional if the government has a legitimate interest in enacting the statute and the law is rationally related to that interest. The court noted that, under this standard, legislation has a “strong presumption of validity.” Additionally, the court observed that laws survive rational basis so long as some conceivable legitimate purpose could have supported passing the law.

The court concluded that the law furthers Guam’s legitimate governmental interest in preserving potential life, protecting maternal health, and promoting the integrity of the medical profession.

The court also disagreed with the plaintiffs’ equal protection challenge to the statute. The plaintiffs in the case are abortion-providing physicians. They argued that the law was unconstitutional because it treated them differently than other doctors. However, the court concluded that the different treatment of doctors under the law passed rational basis review, as “abortion presents different
considerations than other medical procedures.”

The ACLU represents the plaintiffs. In response to the ruling, the deputy director of the ACLU Reproductive Freedom Project, Alexa Kolbi-Molinas stated:

We are deeply disappointed that the court is permitting medically unnecessary government mandates to once again be enforced. Today’s decision imposes unnecessary obstacles on people seeking abortion in Guam, but make no mistake, abortion remains legal in Guam and we will continue to do everything in our power to make sure it stays both legal and accessible.

The district court issued the injunction before the US Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which overturned Roe v. Wade. Before Dobbs, abortion legislation was subject to an undue burden standard.

According to the Ninth Circuit’s opinion, there have not been abortion-providing doctors in Guam since 2018. However, the opinion acknowledged that the law allows in-person meetings with a doctor or an “agent” of the doctor.

Earlier this year, Guam’s district court denied a request to reinstate a total abortion ban on the island.