Gonzales v. Oregon

Supreme Court Ruling A Defining Moment for Aid-in-Dying Law

The US Supreme Court has ruled in favor of choice at the end of life. In a 6 to 3 decision, the court ruled the Attorney General’s attempt to intervene in affairs of the state’s aid-in-dying law has exceeded his authority.

“This is a watershed decision for freedom and democracy in the U.S.,” says Barbara Coombs Lee, Co-CEO and president of Compassion & Choices. “It reaffirms the liberty, dignity and privacy Americans cherish at the end of life.”

“No government should threaten these rights nor usurp a state’s power to meet the needs of its dying citizens,” she says.

For now Oregon’s aid-in-dying law is safe. But Compassion & Choices’ efforts have just begun. We will defend any Congressional attack on the Oregon law.

We will not stop until all Americans can live and die as free people, in dignity and according to their own values.

This case served as a national call to end-of-life care providers around the nation. Thanks to this verdict, facilities now recognize the importance of providing appropriate care. Facilities must share accurate information about what they provide, recognizing the consequences to both patient and provider when misrepresentations are made.

Read the opinion written by Justice Kennedy (PDF)
Read the opinion written by Justice Scalia (PDF)
Read the opinion written by Justice Thomas (PDF)

Editorials

Barbara Coombs Lee: Role Reversal
New York Times: The Assisted-Suicide Decision
Washington Post: Life-and-Death Decisions
Los Angeles Times: States of hypocrisy
Boston Globe: Oregon's Assistants
San Francisco Chronicle: A wise ruling by the high court
Belief Net: U.S. Supreme Court Upholds Oregon's Right-to-Die Law

In the News

Voice of America VIDEO: The Supreme Court Weighs In
OPB NewsHour VIDEO: Assisted Suicide Upheld
New York Times: Fraught Issue, but Narrow Ruling in Oregon Suicide Case
New York Times: Justices Reject U.S. Bid to Block Assisted Suicide
Los Angeles Times: Is California Next in Line?
Oregon Public Broadcasting: Interview with Kathryn Tucker

 

Char Andrews, a patient plaintiff in the Gonzales v. Oregon case, speaking at the
Compassion & Choices press conference in Portland, Oregon, Jan. 17, 2006.

 
About the Case

The U.S. Supreme Court granted the Justice Department's petition to hear its case against Oregon's landmark aid-in-dying law. Formerly known as Oregon v. Ashcroft , the case is now called Gonzales v. Oregon. The court will hear arguments during its 2005-2006 term, which begins in October. Compassion & Choices represents a group of terminally ill Oregonians in challenging the US Attorney General's effort to nullify the Oregon law.

The US Department of Justice (DOJ) maintains that the federal Controlled Substances Act (CSA) empowers the DOJ and/or the Drug Enforcement Administration to punish Oregon physicians who prescribe medications in compliance with the Oregon law. A U.S. District Court and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals rejected this claim, finding that the CSA did not reach the conduct of Oregon physicians who prescribe controlled substances as contemplated by the Oregon law and upholding the right of individual states to regulate medical practice. On the same day he submitted his resignation, former U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft appealed the case to the Supreme Court, and the case goes forward with the new Bush Administration Attorney General, Alberto Gonzales.

This appeal is the latest in a long series of efforts by opponents to nullify Oregon's aid-in-dying law. Compassion & Choices is at the forefront of the legal effort to make sure the will of the people of Oregon is respected, that end-of-life choice in that state is secure, and that Oregon can continue to serve as a model for the rest of the nation on this issue.

Case Resources

To view a timeline of the Gonzales v. Oregon case, click here (PDF)
To read a summary of the Amici Briefs and Quotes, click here (PDF)
To view all documents related to the case, click here