Gonzales v. Oregon
   HOME

TheInfoList



OR:

''Gonzales v. Oregon'', 546 U.S. 243 (2006), was a landmark decision of the
US Supreme Court The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) is the highest court in the federal judiciary of the United States. It has ultimate appellate jurisdiction over all U.S. federal court cases, and over state court cases that involve a point of ...
which ruled that the
United States Attorney General The United States attorney general (AG) is the head of the United States Department of Justice, and is the chief law enforcement officer of the federal government of the United States. The attorney general serves as the principal advisor to the p ...
cannot enforce the federal Controlled Substances Act against physicians who prescribed drugs, in compliance with
Oregon Oregon () is a state in the Pacific Northwest region of the Western United States. The Columbia River delineates much of Oregon's northern boundary with Washington, while the Snake River delineates much of its eastern boundary with Idaho. T ...
state law, to terminally ill patients seeking to end their lives, commonly referred to as assisted suicide. It was the first major case heard by the
Roberts Court The Roberts Court is the time since 2005 during which the Supreme Court of the United States has been led by John Roberts as Chief Justice. It is generally considered to be more conservative than the preceding Rehnquist Court and the most cons ...
under the new Chief Justice of the United States.


Background

In November 1994, voters in the state of Oregon approved Measure 16, a
ballot initiative In political science, an initiative (also known as a popular initiative or citizens' initiative) is a means by which a petition signed by a certain number of registered voters can force a government to choose either to enact a law or hold a p ...
that established the
Oregon Death with Dignity Act Measure 16 of 1994 established the U.S. state of Oregon's Death with Dignity Act (ORS 127.800–995), which legalizes medical aid in dying (commonly referred to as physician-assisted suicide) with certain restrictions. Passage of this initiativ ...
, with 51.3% of voters supporting it and 48.7% opposing it. The Act legalized assisted suicide in the state of Oregon. The law permits physicians to prescribe a lethal dose of medication to a competent adult, agreed by two doctors to be within six months of dying from an incurable condition.ORS 127.800 - 127.897
/ref> As of February 29, 2012, the Oregon Public Health Division reported that since "the law was passed in 1997, a total of 935 people have had DWDA prescriptions written and 596 patients (64% of prescriptions) have died from ingesting medications prescribed under the DWDA." Opponents of the measure sued, and on December 27, 1994, U.S. District Judge
Michael Robert Hogan Michael Robert Hogan (born September 24, 1946) is a former United States district judge of the United States District Court for the District of Oregon. He served as chief judge from 1995 to 2002. He was based at the Wayne L. Morse United States Co ...
issued a preliminary injunction forbidding the state from enforcing the statute, then, on August 3, 1995, declared the law unconstitutional under the Equal Protection Clause. However, after the Supreme Court of the United States rejected that reasoning in '' Washington v. Glucksberg'' (1997), the measure was allowed to take effect. A 1997 referral to voters by the Oregon Legislative Assembly aimed to repeal the Death with Dignity Act but was defeated by a 60% margin. Members of Congress next sought to have the federal government prosecute physicians obeying the new Oregon law, and DEA Administrator Thomas A. Constantine told them that he had authority to do so under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA).Jacob E. Gersen, "Overlapping and Underlapping Jurisdiction in Administrative Law
2006 Sup. Ct. Rev. 201.
However, Attorney General
Janet Reno Janet Wood Reno (July 21, 1938 – November 7, 2016) was an American lawyer who served as the 78th United States attorney general. She held the position from 1993 to 2001, making her the second-longest serving attorney general, behind only Wi ...
rejected that interpretation of the law and determined the federal government had no power to interfere with physicians obeying the Oregon law. Senator
John Ashcroft John David Ashcroft (born May 9, 1942) is an American lawyer, lobbyist and former politician who served as the 79th U.S. Attorney General in the George W. Bush administration from 2001 to 2005. A former U.S. Senator from Missouri and the 50th ...
then supported legislation explicitly granting the Attorney General that authority, but the bills failed to pass. After Senator Ashcroft became
United States Attorney General The United States attorney general (AG) is the head of the United States Department of Justice, and is the chief law enforcement officer of the federal government of the United States. The attorney general serves as the principal advisor to the p ...
in 2001, he secured a memorandum from the
Office of Legal Counsel The Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) is an office in the United States Department of Justice that assists the Attorney General's position as legal adviser to the President and all executive branch agencies. It drafts legal opinions of the Attorney ...
concluding that physician-assisted suicide violates the CSA. On November 9, 2001, Attorney General Ashcroft published an "Interpretive Rule" that physician-assisted suicide was not a legitimate medical purpose and that any physician administering federally controlled drugs for that purpose would be in violation of the Controlled Substances Act. Oregon Attorney General
Hardy Myers Hardy Myers (October 25, 1939 – November 29, 2016) was an American lawyer and Democratic politician who served three terms as the 15th attorney general of the state of Oregon, United States. Prior to taking office in 1997, he served from 1975 ...
, joined by a physician, a pharmacist, and a group of terminally ill patients, all from Oregon, filed a challenge to Attorney General Ashcroft's interpretation in the
United States District Court for the District of Oregon The United States District Court for the District of Oregon (in case citations, D. Ore. or D. Or.) is the federal district court whose jurisdiction comprises the state of Oregon. It was created in 1859 when the state was admitted to the Union ...
. On April 17, 2002, U.S. District Judge Robert E. Jones granted
summary judgment In law, a summary judgment (also judgment as a matter of law or summary disposition) is a judgment entered by a court for one party and against another party summarily, i.e., without a full trial. Summary judgments may be issued on the merits of ...
to Oregon and issued a permanent injunction against the enforcement of the Interpretive Rule.''The Supreme Court, 2005 Term — Leading Cases''
120 Harv. L. Rev. 125 (2006).
On May 26, 2004, that ruling was affirmed by the
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (in case citations, 9th Cir.) is the U.S. federal court of appeals that has appellate jurisdiction over the U.S. district courts in the following federal judicial districts: * District ...
, with Judge
Richard C. Tallman Richard Charles Tallman (born March 3, 1953) is a senior United States circuit judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and a former Judge of the United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review. Early l ...
joined by Senior Circuit Judge Donald P. Lay, over the dissent of Senior Circuit Judge John Clifford Wallace. The circuit panel majority invoked a
clear statement rule In American law, the clear statement rule is a guideline for statutory construction, instructing courts to not interpret a statute in a way that will have particular consequences unless the statute makes unmistakably clear its intent to achieve ...
regarding federalism in the United States to reject Attorney General Ashcroft's interpretation. The federal government's petition for a writ for certiorari was granted and one hour of oral arguments were heard on October 5, 2005, with
Paul Clement Paul Drew Clement (born June 24, 1966) is an American lawyer who served as U.S. Solicitor General from 2004 to 2008 and is known for his advocacy before the U.S. Supreme Court. He established his own law firm, Clement & Murphy, in 2022 after le ...
, the
Solicitor General of the United States The solicitor general of the United States is the fourth-highest-ranking official in the United States Department of Justice. Elizabeth Prelogar has been serving in the role since October 28, 2021. The United States solicitor general represent ...
, personally appearing.


Opinion of the Court

On January 17, 2006, the Court delivered judgment in favor of Oregon, affirming the lower court by a vote of 6–3. Justice
Anthony Kennedy Anthony McLeod Kennedy (born July 23, 1936) is an American lawyer and jurist who served as an associate justice of the Supreme Court of the United States from 1988 until his retirement in 2018. He was nominated to the court in 1987 by Presid ...
, joined by Justices John Paul Stevens, Sandra Day O'Connor,
David Souter David Hackett Souter ( ; born September 17, 1939) is an American lawyer and jurist who served as an associate justice of the U.S. Supreme Court from 1990 until his retirement in 2009. Appointed by President George H. W. Bush to fill the seat ...
,
Ruth Bader Ginsburg Joan Ruth Bader Ginsburg ( ; ; March 15, 1933September 18, 2020) was an American lawyer and jurist who served as an associate justice of the Supreme Court of the United States from 1993 until her death in 2020. She was nominated by Presiden ...
, and Stephen Breyer determined that the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) did not give the Attorney General the power to interfere with physicians obeying the state law. The Court did not dispute the power of the federal government to regulate drugs, but it disagreed that the statute in place empowered the attorney general to overrule state laws on the appropriate use of medications allowed. The Court first determined it did not need to grant substantial deference to the Justice Department's interpretation of its own regulation under ''
Auer v. Robbins ''Auer v. Robbins'', 519 U.S. 452 (1997), is a United States Supreme Court case that concerns the standard that the Court should apply when it reviews an executive department's interpretation of regulations established under federal legislation. ...
'' (1997) because the regulation merely restated the terms of the CSA. Likewise, the Court found that, although the phrase "legitimate medical purpose" in the statute is ambiguous, the Attorney General's interpretation was not entitled to Chevron deference because the CSA delegated medical judgments to the expertise of the
United States Secretary of Health and Human Services The United States secretary of health and human services is the head of the United States Department of Health and Human Services, and serves as the principal advisor to the president of the United States on all health matters. The secretary is ...
, not to the Attorney General. Finally, the Court found the Attorney General's conclusions regarding the phrase unpersuasive under '' Skidmore v. Swift & Co.'' (1944) because Congress would have been more explicit if it had intended to empower the Attorney General to unilaterally create new crimes through regulation.


Dissents


Justice Scalia

Justice Antonin Scalia, joined by Chief Justice
John Roberts John Glover Roberts Jr. (born January 27, 1955) is an American lawyer and jurist who has served as the 17th chief justice of the United States since 2005. Roberts has authored the majority opinion in several landmark cases, including '' Nat ...
and Justice
Clarence Thomas Clarence Thomas (born June 23, 1948) is an American jurist who serves as an associate justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. He was nominated by President George H. W. Bush to succeed Thurgood Marshall and has served since 1 ...
, dissented. Scalia believed that agency deference should be given to the Attorney General under both ''Auer'' and ''Chevron''. Even without granting any agency deference, the Attorney General's interpretation was reasonable because, Scalia argued: "If the term 'legitimate medical purpose' has any meaning, it surely excludes the prescription of drugs to produce death."


Justice Thomas

Justice Thomas also filed a brief dissent, alone. Thomas made clear that, although he still believes the CSA is not empowered by the Constitution's Interstate
Commerce Clause The Commerce Clause describes an enumerated power listed in the United States Constitution ( Article I, Section 8, Clause 3). The clause states that the United States Congress shall have power "to regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and amon ...
to regulate purely intrastate conduct, if it were, the Attorney General's interpretation of the statute would be reasonable. Thomas argued that the opinion of the Court was inconsistent with the reasoning in '' Gonzales v. Raich'' (2005). He also dissented in that decision in which five of the six justices in the majority in ''Oregon'' found broad federal authority under the CSA for Congress to forbid the growth of
medical marijuana Medical cannabis, or medical marijuana (MMJ), is cannabis and cannabinoids that are prescribed by physicians for their patients. The use of cannabis as medicine has not been rigorously tested due to production and governmental restrictions ...
. Thomas had argued for a more limited congressional power under the Commerce Clause in ''Raich'', which focused on intrastate and interstate commerce. In ''Oregon'', by contrast, the case was a matter of the validity of an executive interpretation of that statute.546 U.S. 243 (2006) (Thomas, J., dissenting)


See also

*
List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 546 This is a list of all the United States Supreme Court cases from volume 546 of the ''United States Reports The ''United States Reports'' () are the official record ( law reports) of the Supreme Court of the United States. They include rulings, ...
*
List of United States Supreme Court cases This page serves as an index of lists of United States Supreme Court cases. The United States Supreme Court is the highest federal court of the United States. By Chief Justice Court historians and other legal scholars consider each Chief J ...


References


Notes


External links

*
''Supreme Court Upholds Oregon Suicide Law''
''
Washington Post ''The Washington Post'' (also known as the ''Post'' and, informally, ''WaPo'') is an American daily newspaper published in Washington, D.C. It is the most widely circulated newspaper within the Washington metropolitan area and has a large na ...
'', January 17, 2006.
Legal analysis of the case

Transcript of oral arguments
{{DEFAULTSORT:Gonzales V. Oregon United States Supreme Court cases Assisted suicide United States controlled substances case law 2006 in United States case law American Civil Liberties Union litigation Assisted suicide in the United States Legal history of Oregon Euthanasia law United States Supreme Court cases of the Roberts Court Pharmaceutical regulation in the United States