ORAL ARGUMENTS HEARD ON WHETHER U.S. MUST FACILITATE SUICIDE WITH FEDERALLY CONTROLLED DRUGS.

On May 7, 2003, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral argument on an appeal from Oregon Federal District Court Judge Robert Jones' April 17, 2002, opinion. Judge Jones overturned Attorney General John Ashcroft's ruling that federally controlled drugs may not be used to assist suicide in Oregon, the only state whose laws specifically authorize it.

Although it is dangerous to make predictions based on judges' questions at oral argument, those from Judge Clifford Wallace seemed generally sympathetic to the Ashcroft position, while those from Judge Richard Tallman seemed generally sympathetic to Oregon's pro-suicide position, according to a May 8 story in the Portland Oregonian.

Of greatest concern to pro-life and disability rights opponents of assisted suicide, however, were questions from Judge Donald Lay. According to the Oregonian story, Lay's questions focused on procedural issues, suggesting that there were technical flaws in the suit brought by Oregon and other plaintiffs against the Ashcroft ruling.

If the appellate court rules for or against the Ashcroft directive on the merits, the case will undoubtedly be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which in that case might resolve the issue as early as 2004. Because the Ashcroft ruling has been prevented from taking effect by court orders during the litigation, a swift decision by the Supreme Court offers the best prospect for its implementation. This would bring protection to the lives of those in Oregon who might become victims of assisted suicide facilitated by lethal prescriptions of federally controlled drugs.

If, on the other hand, the ...