Difference between revisions of "Washington v. Glucksberg"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m (bold) |
m (br) |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
: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 decision of the en banc Court of Appeals is reversed, and the case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. | :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 decision of the en banc Court of Appeals is reversed, and the case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. | ||
| + | |||
[[Category:United States Supreme Court Cases]] | [[Category:United States Supreme Court Cases]] | ||
Revision as of 03:46, May 9, 2008
In Washington v. Glucksberg, 521 U.S. 702 (1997), the U.S. Supreme Court held unanimously that the State of Washington's prohibition against "causing" or "aiding" a suicide does not violate the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
Chief Justice William Rehnquist wrote the opinion for the Court, and the liberal wing concurred in a separate opinion. The Court reversed the decision of an en banc sitting of the Ninth Circuit:
- 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 decision of the en banc Court of Appeals is reversed, and the case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.