Western Oregon Journal

The United States Supreme Court began its term with a new Chief Justice and a controversial issue that hits close to home. The Bush administration has decided to challenge the Oregon Death With Dignity Act-a 1994 law that gives Oregon doctors the authority to prescribe controlled substances to mentally competent, terminally-ill patients who are within six months of dying.

The Death With Dignity Act now faces its own potential demise. Gonzalez v. Oregon (formerly Ashcroft v. Oregon) was filed last November by then-Attorney General John Ashcroft who sought to overturn a May 2004 decision from the ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that upheld Oregon's law. Ashcroft, a longtime opponent of assisted suicide, believes that Oregon's practice violated the Controlled Substances Act because it lacks a legitimate medical purpose. The basis for Ashcroft's litigation is an interpretive rule that Ashcroft published in the Federal Register stating that doctors who prescribe controlled substances to assist death could lose their federal-prescription licenses.

More specifically, the Court will determine the validity of the Controlled Substances Act and the authority of Congress to enact such an act via the Commerce Clause in the U.S. Constitution.

Oregon is claiming that the Controlled Substances Act is primarily a drug-enforcement measure that was intended to give the federal government interstate and intrastate control over trafficking in illegal drugs. They claim that it has nothing to do with the Death With Dignity Act. Western Junior Political-Science Major John Valder believes that, "assisted suicide is a personal choice and the government should stay out of personal decisions".

The Bush administration, however, holds a more uninhibited view of the federal law, arguing that the federal government may regulate controlled substances in all contexts under the act. The administration further asserts that the actual taking of drugs to commit suicide is drug abuse. Western Junior Political Science Major Amber Olson believes that, "Congress should have the authority to regulate the control of drugs-because it is the primary goal of government to-protect them from unnecessary harm." Olson also noted that she disagrees with the Death With Dignity Act because of her own personal beliefs and moral values.

This controversial issue could come down to a 1997 case where the justices last considered the issue of assisted suicide (Washington v. Glucksberg). The Court upheld a state ban on assisted suicide; however, it left the issue to the states. The Court concluded, "Throughout the Nation, Americans are engaged in an earnest and profound debate about the morality, legality and practicality of physician-assisted suicide-Our holding permits this debate to continue, as it should in a democratic society" (http://www.lawcornell.edu/supct/html/96-110.ZS.html). Justice Sandra Day O'Connor referred to the states as laboratories for experimentation in the arena of assisted suicide. Her decision could once again be the deciding factor in this case.

Article Tools