Pubdate: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 Source: New York Times (NY) Copyright: 2001 The New York Times Company Contact: http://www.nytimes.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/298 SUICIDE LAW IN OREGON WINS ROUND IN U.S. COURT PORTLAND, Ore., Nov. 20 - A move by Attorney General John Ashcroft to overturn an Oregon law permitting assisted suicide suffered a setback today when a federal judge extended a restraining order against it for at least four months. The restraining order nullifies a Nov. 6 directive by Mr. Ashcroft that authorized federal agents to act against doctors prescribing lethal drugs for terminally ill patients. Oregon is the only state where people are allowed to kill themselves with drugs prescribed by a doctor. Under the state's voter-approved Death with Dignity Act, a terminally ill patient may take the lethal drugs if two doctors agree that the person has less than six months to live and is mentally competent to decide whether to end his life. The judge, Robert E. Jones of Federal District Court, also ruled that the case would move directly to a trial based on the final merits, in effect skipping the preliminary injunction hearing process. The judge asked that the State of Oregon and patients' lawyers file motions for summary judgment within 60 days, after which the federal government would have 30 days to respond, and the state an additional 14 days to reply. After that, Judge Jones expected a swift hearing and a decision within 30 days. In oral arguments today, lawyers for the State of Oregon, which brought the suit, said Janet Reno, the attorney general during the Clinton administration, had already considered the issue of federal power versus state power in this matter and decided that the power rested with the state and that there was no precedent for another attorney general overturn that interpretation. They also said the federal government did not give required notice of its directive or the opportunity for a public hearing. Lawyers for terminally ill patients who joined the suit argued that the patients would bear the greatest hardship if the restraining order were lifted. Gregory Katsas, a lawyer from the Justice Department's headquarters in Washington, argued that the case was not about regulating medicine generally but regulating medicine under the Controlled Substances Act. In his directive, Mr. Ashcroft said that "prescribing, dispensing or administering federally controlled substances to assist suicide" violated the act, which was passed by Congress in 1970. "We say that federal law controls the determination of what is legitimate within the meaning of federal regulations, they say state law trumps federal law," Mr. Katsas said. "No references are made to state law in this statute." - --- MAP posted-by: Doc-Hawk