1997 United States Supreme Court case
Washington v. Glucksberg
|
---|
|
|
Full case name
| Washington, et al., Petitioners v. Harold Glucksberg, et al.
|
---|
Citations
| 521
U.S.
702
(
more
)
117 S. Ct. 2258; 117 S. Ct. 2302; 138
L. Ed. 2d
772; 1997
U.S. LEXIS
4039; 65 U.S.L.W. 4669; 97 Cal. Daily Op. Service 5008; 97 Daily Journal DAR 8150; 11 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 190
|
---|
|
Prior
| 850
F. Supp.
1454
(
W.D. Wash.
1994); reversed, 49
F.3d
586
(
9th Cir.
1995); reversed on rehearing
en banc
, 79
F.3d
790
(9th Cir. 1996);
cert
. granted,
518
U.S.
1057 (1996).
|
---|
|
Due Process Clause
does not protect the right to assistance in committing suicide.
|
|
- Chief Justice
- William Rehnquist
- Associate Justices
- John P. Stevens
·
Sandra Day O'Connor
Antonin Scalia
·
Anthony Kennedy
David Souter
·
Clarence Thomas
Ruth Bader Ginsburg
·
Stephen Breyer
|
|
Majority
| Rehnquist, joined by O'Connor, Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas
|
---|
Concurrence
| O'Connor, joined by Ginsburg, Breyer (in part)
|
---|
Concurrence
| Stevens (in judgment)
|
---|
Concurrence
| Souter (in judgment)
|
---|
Concurrence
| Ginsburg (in judgment)
|
---|
Concurrence
| Breyer (in judgment)
|
---|
Washington v. Glucksberg
, 521 U.S. 702 (1997), was a
landmark decision
of the
U.S. Supreme Court
, which unanimously held that a right to
assisted suicide in the United States
was not protected by the
Due Process Clause
.
[1]
Some legal experts have argued that this case was incorrectly decided stating that it failed to recognize the issue of assisted death as a "fundamental aspect of the right to privacy" and therefore, the Court should have used strict scrutiny rather than rational basis review.
[2]
[3]
Background
[
edit
]
Harold Glucksberg, a physician, four other physicians, three terminally ill patients, and the non-profit organization Compassion in Dying challenged
Washington
's ban against
assisted suicide
in the Natural Death Act of 1979. They claimed that
assisted suicide
was a liberty interest protected by the Due Process Clause of the
Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution
.
On May 3, 1994, US District Court Judge
Barbara Jacobs Rothstein
ruled in favor of Glucksberg.
[4]
On March 9, 1995, the
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
reversed, with Judge
John T. Noonan Jr.
joined by
Diarmuid O'Scannlain
.
[5]
After rehearing the case
en banc
, the Ninth Circuit on May 28, 1996, reversed the earlier panel and affirmed the District Court's decision, in an opinion by Judge
Stephen Reinhardt
.
[6]
Washington Attorney General
Christine Gregoire
petitioned the Supreme Court for a writ of
certiorari
, which was granted. The case was argued before the Supreme Court on January 8, 1997.
Walter E. Dellinger III
, the acting
Solicitor General of the United States
, appeared as an
amicus curiae
, urging reversal.
[7]
The question presented was whether the protection of the Due Process Clause included a right to commit suicide and to do so with another's assistance.
Decision
[
edit
]
Chief Justice
William Rehnquist
wrote the majority opinion for the court. His decision reversed the Ninth Circuit's decision that the ban on physician-assisted suicide was a violation of the Due Process Clause. The Court held that because assisted suicide is not a fundamental liberty interest, it was not protected under the Fourteenth Amendment. As previously decided in the plurality opinion of
Moore v. East Cleveland
,
[8]
liberty interests not "deeply rooted in the nation's history" do not qualify as being a protected liberty interest. The Court found that assisted suicide had been frowned upon for centuries and a majority of the states had similar bans on assisted suicide. Rehnquist found the English common law penalties associated with assisted suicide particularly significant. For example, at early common law the state confiscated the property of a person who committed suicide. Like Blackmun in
Roe v. Wade
,
[9]
Rehnquist used English common law to establish American tradition as a yardstick for determining what rights were "deeply rooted in the nation's history." Rehnquist cited
Roe v. Wade
and
Planned Parenthood v. Casey
[10]
in the opinion.
The Court felt that the ban was rational in that it furthered such compelling state interests as the preservation of human life and the protection of the mentally ill and disabled from medical malpractice and coercion. It further protected those moved to end their lives because of financial or psychological complications. The Court also felt that if it declared physician-assisted suicide a constitutionally protected right, it would start down the path to voluntary and perhaps involuntary euthanasia. Justice O'Connor concurred, and Justices Souter, Ginsburg, Breyer, and Stevens each wrote opinions concurring in the judgment of the court. In 2008, Washington voters approved 58?42% the
Washington Death with Dignity Act
, which established guidelines for using the services of a physician to terminate one's life.
Legacy
[
edit
]
In
Obergefell v. Hodges
(2015), the Court found that
Glucksberg
'
s formula that rights had to be "deeply rooted" in history was "inconsistent" with the approach the Court had used in other cases, such as
Loving v. Virginia
(1967) and
Lawrence v. Texas
(2003).
[11]
However, in
Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization
(2022), the Court based its argument on the formula in
Glucksberg
.
[12]
See also
[
edit
]
References
[
edit
]
- ^
Washington v. Glucksberg
,
521
U.S.
702
(1997).
- ^
"Washington v. Glucksberg Was Tragically Wrong"
.
- ^
Hansen, Alexa (January 1, 2008).
"Unqualified Interests, Definitive Definitions: Washington v. Glucksberg and the Definition of Life"
.
UC Law Constitutional Quarterly
.
36
(1): 163.
ISSN
0094-5617
.
- ^
Compassion in Dying v. Washington
,
850 F. Supp. 1454
(
W.D. Wash.
1994).
- ^
Compassion in Dying v. Washington
,
49 F.3d 586
(
9th Cir.
1995).
- ^
Compassion in Dying v. Washington
,
79 F.3d 790
(
9th Cir.
1996).
- ^
"Washington v. Glucksberg"
. Oyez. Retrieved April 24, 2017.
- ^
Moore v. City of East Cleveland
,
431
U.S.
494
(1977).
- ^
Roe v. Wade
,
410
U.S.
113
(1973).
- ^
Planned Parenthood v. Casey
,
505
U.S.
833
(1992).
- ^
Yoshino, Kenji
(June 26, 2015).
"Supreme Court 2015: Obergefell v. Hodges links liberty and equality"
.
Slate
. Retrieved
June 28,
2022
.
- ^
Blake, Aaron (May 3, 2022).
"The Supreme Court's draft opinion on overturning Roe v. Wade, annotated"
.
The Washington Post
.
Archived
from the original on May 5, 2022
. Retrieved
June 28,
2022
.
External links
[
edit
]
|
---|
|
|
|
---|
Race
| |
---|
Sex
| |
---|
Sexual orientation
| |
---|
Alienage
| |
---|
Residency
| |
---|
Other
| |
---|
|
|
|
|