Justices Uphold Oregon Assisted-Suicide Law; 6-3 Ruling is a Defeat for the Bush Administration
Posted on: Wednesday, 18 January 2006, 15:00 CST
By GINA HOLLAND, THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court on Tuesday blocked the Bush administration's attempt to punish doctors who help terminally ill patients die, protecting Oregon's one-of-a-kind assisted-suicide law.
It was the first loss for Chief Justice John Roberts, who joined the court's most conservative members - Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas - in a long but restrained dissent.
The administration improperly tried to use a federal drug law to pursue Oregon doctors who prescribe lethal doses of prescription medicines, the court said in a rebuke to former Attorney General John Ashcroft.
The 6-3 ruling could encourage other states to consider copying Oregon's law, used to end the lives of more than 200 seriously ill people in that state. The decision, one of the biggest expected from the court this year, also could set the stage for Congress to attempt to outlaw assisted suicide.
"Congress did not have this far-reaching intent to alter the federal-state balance," Justice Anthony M. Kennedy wrote for the majority - himself, retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor and Justices John Paul Stevens, David Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer.
With this decision, Kennedy showed signs of becoming a more influential swing voter after O'Connor departs. He is a moderate conservative who sometimes joins more liberal members on cases involving such things as gay rights and capital punishment.
In some ways, the decision was an anticlimactic end to the court's latest clash over assisted suicide.
The case was argued in October on Roberts' second day on the bench, and he strongly hinted that he would back the Bush administration. Some court watchers had expected O'Connor to be the decisive vote, which could have delayed the case until her successor was on the court. The Senate is set to vote soon on nominee Samuel Alito.
Justices have dealt with end-of-life cases before, most recently in 1997 when the court unanimously ruled that people have no constitutional right to die. That decision, by then-Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, left room for states to set their own rules.
Tuesday's ruling, and dissents, were tinged with an understanding about the delicate nature of the subject. The court itself is aging and the death of Rehnquist in September after a battle with cancer was emotional for the justices.
Scalia said in his dissent that the court's ruling "is perhaps driven by a feeling that the subject of assisted suicide is none of the federal government's business. It is easy to sympathize with that position."
At the same time, Scalia said, federal officials have the power to regulate doctors in prescribing addictive drugs and "if the term 'legitimate medical purpose' has any meaning, it surely excludes the prescription of drugs to produce death."
He was joined in the dissent by Thomas and Roberts. Roberts did not write separately to explain his vote. Thomas also wrote his own dissent.
White House press secretary Scott McClellan said, "The president remains fully committed to building a culture of life, a culture of life that is built on valuing life at all stages."
The court majority dealt harshly with Ashcroft, who in 2001 declared that Oregon doctors who helped people die would be violating the federal Controlled Substances Act. Lower courts prevented any punishment while Ashcroft's authority was contested by Oregon, a physician, a pharmacist and terminally ill patients.
Kennedy said the "authority claimed by the attorney general is both beyond his expertise and incongruous with the statutory purposes and design."
Oregon's law, which was passed by voters, covers only extremely sick people - those with incurable diseases and who are of sound mind. At least two doctors must agree the ill have six months or less to live before they can use the law.
* * *
Source: Record, The; Bergen County, N.J.
Related Articles
- Brown 'totally against' assisted suicide
- Americans United For Life Denounces Montana Court's Assisted Suicide Decision, Urges Appeal
- HIGH COURT RULING ON ASSISTED SUICIDE ; Letting the People Decide
- Assisted-Suicide Law Affirmed: ; Other States Could Copy Oregon Law After Supreme Court Ruling
- Assisted Suicide Decision Praised, Condemned Locally
- Assisted-Suicide Law Attack Fails
- Editorials on Supreme Court's Assisted-Suicide Decision
- Court to Hear Oregon Assisted Suicide Law Case
- Court's Decision on Assisted Suicide Due
User Comments (0)

RSS Feeds