By Gina Tabonares
Variety News Staff

LAWYERS pursuing the Guam bond borrowing questions are all set to face the nine U.S. Supreme Court justices who will hear the oral arguments of the counsels for Gov. Felix P. Camacho and Attorney General Alicia Limtiaco.
The nine justices led by Chief Justice John Roberts Jr. will determine whether the U.S. Supreme Court has jurisdiction on the issue and whether the local Supreme Court misinterpreted the phrase “aggregate tax valuation” in the Guam Organic Act debt limitation provision.
The questions were raised by former Attorney General Douglas Moylan, who blocked the bond borrowing plan of the governor and the 28th Legislature, saying government officials did not follow the law.
As of press time, newly installed Attorney General Alicia Limtiaco and Camacho were witnessing the oral arguments wherein both petitioner and respondent were given 30 minutes to argue.
Limtiaco said a rebuttal after the respondent’s argument may be given to the petitioner, “but it is up to the justices”.
Limtiaco, who earlier expressed apprehension over the lack of preparation for the bond case, told Variety that she now has a complete comprehension of the petition after she was briefed by Washingto, D.C. lawyers hired by the Attorney General’s Office to pursue the questions.
She said she was able to read all the pleadings and that she has been conferring with Atty. Sex Waxman of Wilmer Hale LLP who will argue for the case.
“I know that both sides have the strongest and best arguments to the U.S. Supreme Court. The arguments in this case are complex. I am looking to forward a final resolution of the legal issue and I am looking forward to the best interests of the people of Guam,” Limtiaco said over a long-distance phone interview.
Limtiaco said once the high court decides, the people of Guam can move forward accordingly.
“Given my discussion with members of our community over the last several months, I saw the importance of the resolution of the case. Everybody wants to know the legal and right way. I want to see the final resolution of this matter,” Limtiaco added.
Dan Benjamin of Calvo & Clark, the lawyer for the Office of the Governor, recognizes the importance of the question but maintains that the U.S. Supreme Court has no jurisdiction on the matter because it was already decided by the local Supreme Court and that the petitioner did not actually obtain an extension of time for filing the case.
The governor’s lawyer said the former attorney general could have filed a petition for a writ of certiorari within 90 days of Congress’ elimination of the 9th Circuit’s jurisdiction on Oct. 30, 2004.
Benjamin argued that Moylan could have requested that the 9th Circuit vacate the judgment and remand the case to the Guam Supreme Court so that it could re-enter its judgment and facilitate the filing.
But because Moylan did not take such actions, Benjamin said the U.S. Supreme Court has no jurisdiction over the case.
With respect to the merits of the petition, Benjamin said the Guam Supreme Court properly interpreted the Guam Organic Act to limit the Guam Legislature to borrowing no more than 10 percent of the appraised value of taxable property on Guam.
He said the Guam Supreme Court is also well-supported when Congress has imposed debt limitations in other circumstances without any reference to “assessed “ valuation and has interpreted such provisions to constitute a limitation based upon the “total value of the taxable property.”
Benjamin added that contrary to Moylan’s claims, the bond borrowing at issue will not overburden future generations because the bonds at issue will refinance the debts of prior administrations at a more favorable interest rates and would primarily meet pre-existing governmental obligations. .