| Revision as of 16:48, 17 January 2006 editBD2412 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, IP block exemptions, Administrators2,449,450 editsm footnote citation to text← Previous edit | Revision as of 17:37, 17 January 2006 edit undoPostdlf (talk | contribs)Administrators91,177 editsm oopsNext edit → | ||
| Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
| |- | |- | ||
| | valign="top"| <small>Prior history: | | valign="top"| <small>Prior history: | ||
| | valign="top"|<small>Summary judgment granted to plaintiffs in part, '' |
| valign="top"|<small>Summary judgment granted to plaintiffs in part, ''Oregon v. Ashcroft'', 192 F. Supp.2d 1077 (D. Or. 2002); affirmed, 368 F.3d 1118 (9th Cir. 2003); cert. granted, sub. nom. ''Gonzales v. Oregon'', 125 S.Ct. 1299 (2005) | ||
| |- | |- | ||
| | valign="top"| <small>Subsequent history: | | valign="top"| <small>Subsequent history: | ||
Revision as of 17:37, 17 January 2006
 | This article documents a current event. Information may change rapidly as the event progresses, and initial news reports may be unreliable. The latest updates to this article may not reflect the most current information. Feel free to improve this article or discuss changes on the talk page, but please note that updates without valid and reliable references will be removed. (Learn how and when to remove this message) |
| Gonzales v. Oregon | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| File:SCOTUS seal.jpg Supreme Court of the United States | ||||||||
| Argued October 5, 2005 Decided January 17, 2006 | ||||||||
| ||||||||
| Holding | ||||||||
| The U.S. Attorney General does not have the authority under the Controlled Substances Act to prohibit doctors from prescribing drugs for use in physician-assisted suicide permitted by state law. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed. | ||||||||
| Court membership | ||||||||
| ||||||||
| Case opinions | ||||||||
| ||||||||
| Laws applied | ||||||||
| Ore. Rev. Stat. § 127.800 et seq. (2003) (Oregon Death With Dignity Act); 21 U.S.C. § 801 et seq. (Controlled Substances Act); 66 Fed. Reg. 56608 (2001) |
Gonzales v. Oregon, (docket #:04-623) (2006), is a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States upheld an Oregon law which permits physician-assisted suicide for persons agreed to be terminally ill. It was the first case to be heard under the leadership of Chief Justice John Roberts.
Facts
In 1994, voters in the State of Oregon approved Oregon Ballot Measure 16 by a margin of 31,962 votes and retained this measure by 220,445 votes in a 1997 special election attempt to repeal the law. The law permits physicians to prescribe a lethal dose of medication to a patient agreed by two doctors to be within six months of dying from an incurable condition. As of 2004, 208 individuals had ended their lives under the law.
Attorney General John Ashcroft challenged the law as a violation of the federal power to regulate prescription drugs under the Controlled Substances Act.
Opinion of the Court
In a 6-3 decision by Justice Anthony Kennedy, the Court upheld the Oregon law and rebuked the Attorney General for assuming that the Controlled Substances Act gave him "the authority and the expertise" to challenge it.
Dissent
Justice Antonin Scalia dissented, joined by Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Clarence Thomas. Scalia, arguing for the power of the federal government to over-ride the will of the states or the people therein, wrote that "f the term 'legitimate medical purpose' has any meaning, it surely excludes the prescription of drugs to produce death".
Trivia
Oral arguments were held on October 5, 2005 and the decision was delivered on January 17, 2006. Retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor was on the Court for arguments in this case, and her vote would not have counted if a successor was confirmed before the Court rendered a decision. However, the decision was rendered while the confirmation hearings for Samuel Alito, who has been nominated to replace O'Connor, were ongoing. This had no effect on the outcome, as the majority would still have had five votes without O'Connor.
The case is named Gonzales v. Oregon rather than Ashcroft v. Oregon because the Court traditionally substitutes the current officeholder (in this case, Attorney General, Alberto Gonzales), for the officeholder responsible for the prosecution at the time the case was filed. Ashcroft himself had brought the case on the day that his retirement was announced.
External links
- Full text of the Supreme Court's decision
- Supreme Court Upholds Oregon Suicide Law, Washington Post, January 17, 2006.
- Legal analysis of the case