/images/green_3rd_header_news_releases_112001.gif
SECTIONS
home
what we do
history and facts
news
contribute
voices
resources

IN THIS SECTION

newsletter
press releases
state news

EMAIL UPDATES



ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF PHYSICIANS AND PHARMACISTS BEFORE JUDGE JONES IN State of Oregon v. U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft
November 20, 2001

CONTACT: Greg Eddleston (503) 228.6079 

November 20, 2001, Portland, OR --- Seeking to protect terminally ill Oregonians from Attorney General John Ashcroft’s decision to prosecute physicians and pharmacists, the Oregon Death with Dignity Center today continued its defense of Oregon’s landmark end-of-life legislation.

On behalf of Dr. Peter Rasmussen and pharmacist David M. Hochhalter, both of Salem, Oregon, Eli D. Stutsman, Portland attorney, argued the judge’s decision should rest on four basic points:

1.                   The CSA does not apply. The Controlled Substances Act (CSA) created a “closed system” intended to prevent trafficking and diversion and physicians and pharmacists who practice under the Death with Dignity Act are in full compliance with the state’s standard of care and are not trafficking or diverting drugs.

2.                   DOJ cannot change previous rulings in this manner. The Attorney General violated the Administrative Procedures Act by attempting to promulgate a substantive regulation (or amend an existing regulation) without following the mandatory notice and comment procedure.

3.                   Ashcroft pushes federal v. state limits.  The CSA lacks the requisite “clear statement” that the Supreme Court has required before it will find that Congress intended to alter the federal-state framework – in this case by permitting federal encroachment into area traditionally reserved to the states.

4.                   Ashcroft abuses commerce clause.  The manner in which Oregonians die is not interstate commerce, nor may the federal government use a trivial connection to commerce to justify a heavy-handed federal intrusion into areas traditionally reserved to the states.  The states are capable of addressing this issue themselves, and should be permitted to do so, as the Supreme Court contemplated in Glucksburg v. Washington, 521 U.S. 702, 117 S.Ct. 2258, 2275 (1997).

“Boomers are watching parents and friends die often horrible deaths and they are demanding the system change. It has in Oregon, it works, and Judge Jones needs to allow this law to work while the courts do their business. Oregon’s law is the catalyst for improved end-of-life care and patient control across the nation,” said Scott Swenson, Oregon Death with Dignity executive director.

Mr. Stutsman will be available following the hearing, first on the steps of the courthouse, then by phone: contact Greg Eddleston (503) 228.6079 for interview.

Mr. Swenson is available at (202) 249.9857.

 

>> back to top

home | search | site guide | contact us | privacy policy

©2001-2008, all rights reserved, Death with Dignity National Center