Washington v. Glucksberg

Washington v. Glucksberg et al.
Negotiated January 8, 1997
Decided June 26, 1997
Surname: Washington et al. Petitioner v. Dr. Harold Glucksberg Quoted: 521 U.S.
facts
Certiorari to clarify the question of whether the US Constitution guarantees the citizens of the country a right to medically supervised euthanasia.
decision
The 14th additional article (Due Process Clause) does not guarantee the right to claim medical help in the event of a suicide .
occupation
Chairman: William Rehnquist Assessors: Antonin Scalia , Anthony Kennedy , Clarence Thomas , Ruth Ginsburg , Stephen Breyer , John P. Stevens , David Souter , Sandra Day O'Connor
Positions
Majority opinion: {{{majority opinion}}} Approving: {{{Approving}}} Deviating opinion: {{{Deviating_Meinung}}} Minor opinion: {{{Minor opinion}}}
Applied Law
14. Amendment to the United States Constitution

Washington v. Glucksberg is a case before the United States Supreme Court on the question of whether United States citizens have a constitutionally guaranteed right to seek medical assistance in a self-responsible suicide.

background

A lawsuit from the doctor Dr. Harold Glucksberg and four of his colleagues aimed to have a statutory ban on euthanasia by the Supreme Court lifted. In doing so, they relied on the 14th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States , which guaranteed fundamental freedoms, which, in their opinion, also included a right to medical accompaniment to suicide . A ban on medical euthanasia is therefore unconstitutional. The lawsuit was initially successful in a district court and an appeals court. However, the Washington State put each calling one, recently the Supreme Court.

judgment

In a unanimous decision, the court denied that the US Constitution guaranteed a right to euthanasia and thus declared Washington State law to be constitutional. A right to euthanasia is not anchored in the tradition of the USA. In the past, society has always viewed suicides and assistance with such acts with great skepticism. Therefore, the plaintiffs could not invoke a fundamental right to freedom, which is violated by Washington law. In addition, the state had demonstrated a convincing interest in upholding the law, namely the protection of human life and the avoidance of possible abuse.

Political aftermath

In 2008, Washington state voters voted by a majority of 58% - 42% to amend the state's constitution to allow medical euthanasia under certain conditions.

Web links

• Washington v. Glucksberg, the hearing

Individual evidence

1. ^ Death with Dignity Act , accessed July 8, 2017.