Washington, D.C. - Today, in the case of Gonzalez v. State of Oregon, the Supreme Court ruled that the U.S. Attorney General lacked authority to ban controlled substances from being used to assist committing suicide in Oregon. In the 6-3 decision written by Justice Anthony Kennedy, Justice Thomas and Scalia filed separate dissents. Chief Justice John Roberts and Thomas joined Scalia's dissent. Liberty Counsel filed an amicus brief with the High Court in support of the U.S. Attorney General, arguing that controlled substances should not be used for suicide.

Oregon's Death with Dignity Act allows for a physician-assisted suicide. The U.S. Attorney General interpreted the federal Controlled Substances Act ("CSA") to prohibit physicians from prescribing controlled substances for assisted suicide. The CSA was designed to regulate drugs for the purpose of healing or controlling pain, not terminating human life.

The majority opinion appears to back away from its previous decision that recognized the broad and comprehensive framework of the CSA. The majority concluded that the CSA is concerned only with "illicit drug dealing and trafficking." In dissent, Scalia argued that the Attorney General's interpretation of "legitimate medical purpose" was valid and entitled to substantial deference under the law. Moreover, his interpretation was the most natural reading of the CSA. Finally, he argued that the Attorney General's decision to ban the use of controlled substances for suicide was in the "public interest" and in furtherance of "public health and safety."

The majority wrote that the CSA "and our case law amply support the conclusion that Congress regulates medical practice insofar as it bars doctors from using their prescription-writing powers as a means to engage in illicit drug dealing and trafficking as conventionally understood. Beyond this, however, the statute manifests no intent to regulate the practice of medicine generally....The structure and operation of the CSA presume and rely upon a functioning medical profession regulated under the State's police powers." The Court said it was difficult "to defend the Attorney General's declaration that the statute impliedly criminalizes physician-assisted suicide."

Mathew D. Staver, President and General Counsel of Liberty Counsel, stated: "When a physician participates in a person's suicide by administering controlled substances, the line between healer and executioner is blurred, and the sanctity of life is lost. America should not become like Sweden, where patients wonder whether a physician with a syringe brings life or death. Since controlled substances are regulated under federal law, permitting such drugs to be used to end life compels all Americans to indirectly become complicit in euthanasia."