News Release

July 19, 2005

Media Contact: (202) 789-5200

Cato Brief Urges Supreme Court to Uphold Oregon's Assisted Dying Law
Can the federal government regulate end-of-life decisionmaking?

WASHINGTON -- The U.S. Supreme Court is scheduled this fall to hear Gonzales v. Oregon, a legal challenge to Oregon's Death With Dignity Act filed by the Bush Administration. The Oregon law, approved by two state-wide referenda, allows doctors to assist terminally ill patients who want to die. Yet, the Department of Justice says that physicians who do so are subject to federal sanctions.

The friend of the court brief filed this week by the Cato Institute argues that the Constitution does not give the Department of Justice power to interfere with Oregon's laws in this way.

Cato's brief is co-authored by Pamela Harris, Garrett Wotkyns, Schan Duff, and Laura de Jaager, of the law firm of O'Melveny & Myers LLP, and by Cato legal expert Mark Moller. Pamela Harris, lead counsel for the Cato Institute, is a noted Supreme Court advocate and former professor of law at the University of Pennsylvania Law School.

Mark Moller is available to comment on the Gonzales v. Oregon case:

"The Bush Administration has a poor track record when it comes to respecting the constitutional authority of local government," says Moller. "Here, it's on particularly weak ground: First, Congress hasn't authorized the Attorney General to second-guess the policy choices of Oregon's citizens in this case. And, second, the Constitution reserves primary power over medical regulation to the states. Butting into Oregon's affairs may score short-term points with the President's electoral base, but it also does great damage to the Constitution."

Moller says the case illustrates that the Rehnquist Court's "federalism revolution" transcends party politics. "Oregon's law is a prime example of an historically liberal state pursuing locally popular polices that can't be enacted on the national level. The Court's revival of principled limits on federal power protects Oregon's right to do so without interference by a Republican administration."

For more information on the Gonzales v. Oregon case or to arrange an interview with a Cato legal expert, contact the media relations department at 202-789-5200 or pr@cato.org.