Constitution provides no right to be killed
Article Abstract:
The decision of the United States Court of Appeals in Quill v. Vacco and other cases holding that state laws outlawing physician-assisted suicide violated the constitution created rights which do not exist in the Constitution and are inconsistent with our legal heritage's affirmation of life. Moreoverm, such decisions could, in a time of medical cost-cutting, prove new ways to shunt aside people who are seriously ill. Once affirmative killing is put on a par with refusing medical treatment, neither can ever be banned. Affirmative murder is very different from removing medical aid.
Publication Name: The National Law Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0162-7325
Year: 1996
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
Assisted suicide is a federal case
Article Abstract:
Federal court is the appropriate forum for challenges to state laws that infringe on the right to die by restricting physician-assisted suicide. The federal courts can get involved without promoting assisted suicide by ensuring that state laws do not encroach on individuals' more compelling interest in being free of extreme pain and suffering. Recent federal court rulings have found little difference between disconnecting life-support systems and prescribing drug to hasten death. Federal jurisdiction will promote consistency and access for individuals in pain.
Publication Name: The National Law Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0162-7325
Year: 1996
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
Defense of marriage - or attack on family?
Article Abstract:
The federal Defense of Marriage Act codifies an exception to the Constitution's full faith and credit clause because it invites states not to recognize same-sex marriages performed by states in which they are legal. The act uses political expedience to define the family and thereby poses federalism problems more serious than its impact on same-sex marriages. Moreover, the law is unnecessary because states need not recognize the acts of other states when doing so would violate their own public policy.
Publication Name: The National Law Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0162-7325
Year: 1996
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
- Abstracts: Arts grant restrictions struck down; decision is the latest to find free-speech message in abortion-counseling case
- Abstracts: Failure to provide COBRA coverage upon a reduction in hours does not violate COBRA due to existence of dual coverage and no significant gap in coverage
- Abstracts: Pollution exclusion puts unwary insureds at risk; the application of environmental clauses to unrelated areas of coverage is catalyst for litigation
- Abstracts: Antitrust policy in aftermarkets. Demand elasticities in antitrust analysis. A quality-signaling rationale for aftermarket tying
- Abstracts: Flight isn't about guilt. At trial, grab the chance for a grand opening. Political justice: vive la similarite