Home>News Center>World
         
 

US high court clashes over assisted suicide
(AP)
Updated: 2005-10-06 14:53

New US Chief Justice John Roberts stepped forward Wednesday as an aggressive defender of federal authority to block doctor-assisted suicide, as the Supreme Court clashed over an Oregon law that lets doctors help terminally ill patients end their lives.

The justices will decide if the federal government, not states, has the final say on the life-or-death issue.

It was a wrenching debate for a court touched personally by illness. Roberts replaced William H. Rehnquist, who died a month ago after battling cancer for nearly a year. Three justices have had cancer and a fourth has a spouse who counsels children with untreatable cancer.

The outcome is hard to predict, in part because of the uncertain status of retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor who seemed ready to support Oregon's law. Her replacement may be confirmed before the ruling is handed down, possibly months from now.

Roberts repeatedly raised concerns that a single exception for Oregon would allow other states to create a patchwork of rules.

Ruth Gallaid from Eugene, Or., who supports physician assisted suicide, protests in front of the Supreme Court Wednesday, Oct. 5, 2005, in Washington.
Ruth Gallaid from Eugene, Or., who supports physician assisted suicide, protests in front of the Supreme Court Wednesday, Oct. 5, 2005, in Washington. [AP]
"If one state can say it's legal for doctors to prescribe morphine to make people feel better, or to prescribe steroids for bodybuilding, doesn't that undermine the uniformity of the federal law and make enforcement impossible?" he asked.

The Supreme Court eight years ago concluded that the dying have no constitutional right to doctor-assisted suicide. O'Connor provided a key fifth vote in that decision, which left room for state-by-state experimentation.

The new case is a turf battle of sorts, started by former Attorney General John Ashcroft, a favorite among the president's conservative religious supporters. Hastening someone's death is an improper use of medication and violates federal drug laws, Ashcroft reasoned in 2001, an opposite conclusion from the one reached by Attorney General Janet Reno in the Clinton administration.

Oregon won a lawsuit in a lower court over its voter-approved law, which took effect in 1997 and has been used by 208 people.

The Supreme Court appeared sharply divided in hearing the Bush administration's appeal.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who has had colon cancer, talked about medicines that make a sick person's final moments more comfortable. David Souter, in an emotional moment, said that it's one thing for the government to ban date rape drugs and harmful products but "that seems to me worlds away from what we're talking about here."
Page: 12



Iran's nuclear talks may resume soon
Building blast kills one, injures 3 in Istanbul
Bali bombings kill 25, 100 injured
 
  Today's Top News     Top World News
 

Beijing targets a harmonious society in Five-Year Plan

 

   
 

Second manned space flight set on Oct 13

 

   
 

US to review textile petitions on China

 

   
 

Australia, mediator between US and China?

 

   
 

China sees 2005 trade surplus over $90bln

 

   
 

CCB plans up to US$7.64b in IP0 - sources

 

   
  Saddam's October trial may be delayed
   
  Australia, mediator between US and China?
   
  White House spy stole classified documents
   
  Bush: US to stay on offense in Iraq
   
  Ramadan bomber kills 26 at Shi'ite mosque in Iraq
   
  Hurricane Stan kills 133 in Mexico, Central America
   
 
  Go to Another Section  
 
 
  Story Tools  
   
  News Talk  
  Are the Republicans exploiting the memory of 9/11?  
Advertisement