SCOTUSblog has the story.
The Supreme Court on Tuesday cleared the way for Oregon to continue to allow doctors to provide the drugs that terminally ill patients may use to take their own lives. The Court, saying that the U.S. attorney general had sought to make "a radical shift" of power from state to federal government, ruled that the head of the Justice Department does not have the power to bar doctors from prescribing lethal drugs for suicides. So far, Oregon is the only state to permit that medical practice.The ruling divided the Court 6-3; Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., was one of the dissenters -- his first dissent, although he did not personally write an opinion.
The Court conceded that the attorney general does have the authority to write rules for enforcing federal laws on illegal drugs. But, it said, federal law "does not authorize the Attorney General to bar dispensing coontrolled substances for assisted suicide in the face of a state medical regime permitting such conduct."
While allowing doctor-aided suicide to continue when a state allows it, the Court made no sweeping declarations about patients' or doctors' rights. The decision, rather, was based almost entirely upon the Court's interpretation of what Congress had done in giving the federal government the authority to regulate the prescription of drugs by doctors.
Federalism apparently still has some supporters.
2 comments:
As much as I'd like to think that Federalism carried the day I'm forced to conclude that the decisions were made on ideological grounds instead. Just look at how the Court split and tell me it ain't so (no really, I'd love to be proven wrong).
I'll admit that from first view this looks very much like the decision was based on idealism. But I'd say it would be idealism on both sides.
I'm going to try and find out more on what the standings were and the reasoning. So far the commentary has been light, but I'm sure I'll find some assistance on the topic soon.
Post a Comment