X-Message-Number: 8353 Date: Sat, 28 Jun 1997 13:58:21 -0700 From: David Brandt-Erichsen <> Subject: Supreme Court decision The Supreme Court decision against the right-to-die has been widely reported as leaving the matter up to the states. However, the decision itself does not say this. The closest thing it says is: "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." The entire decision can be found at: http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/supct.June.1997.html The decision is a poor one for two reasons (besides the fact that liberty was not expanded): (1) The Court bought all the arguments against physician-assisted suicide and used them to justify the states having authority to outlaw it. This will make it more difficult to get legislators to change the law. (2) There was no statement that states could legalize physician-assisted suicide. Although the latter was not the subject of the cases and did not need to be addressed, the fact that it was not addressed will prolong the whole process. The thing to watch now is the Oregon case, which is still on hold while being appealed to the Supreme Court. The Ninth Circuit has upheld the Oregon law, and if the Supreme Court refuses to hear the appeal, it will, by that act, uphold the right of states to legalize physician-assisted suicide. There is no timetable, as yet, on when the Supreme Court will decide whether or not to hear this case. The subject is further complicated by the fact that the Oregon legislature had voted to send the law back to the voters in November. The Court may consider the appeal moot in this circumstance, because the "old" law is no longer relevant, and if the "new" identical law passes again we may have to go through this all over again from ground zero! Incidentally, the news reports have not indicated that it is not yet a certainty that the Oregon law will go back to the voters in November. It is certain that the legislature has voted to do so, and that the governor cannot veto this vote. However, the legislature has not authorized the funds to hold the election, and there seems to be some difficulty in doing so. Also, the governor does have the power to veto those funds. The other case to watch is the Hall case before the Florida Supreme Court. A decision on this was expected a couple of weeks ago but was delayed. It is now expected "any day now." This case is based on the Florida Constitution and so is not affected by the U.S. Supreme Court Decision. Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=8353