KRT CampusThe docket for the Supreme Court in the next few years will take on many controversial issues.
This ambitious agenda comes amidst much change and uncertainty for the court. With new Chief Justice John Roberts leading the court, it is too soon to predict which side he will fall on in many issues.
Adding to the uncertainty is the upcoming retirement of Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, who will step down as soon as her predecessor is confirmed.
O’Connor, famous for being the swing vote on many issues, may not have her vote counted in decisions which come after the confirmation of her predecessor, but before an official decision on a case is handed down. Without O’Connor’s vote, there is potential for a court stalemate until those issues can be re-evaluated once the new justice joins the court.
In this two-part series, Student Life looks at several issues the court will be facing. Today’s issue looks at abortion, the death penalty and assisted suicide.
On Wednesday, we will examine homosexual rights and intellectual property rights.
Abortion
When does life begin? One of the central questions in the abortion law debate concerns at what point a fetus becomes viable, or when it could survive outside the womb.
With advances in technology, this point is becoming earlier and earlier. Reproductive technology is also advancing in areas of in vitro fertilization, genetic selection and cloning.
Two cases regarding abortion will be argued on Nov. 30. In Scheidler v.the National Organization for Women (NOW), NOW and other abortion providers are seeking damages against anti-abortion protestors.
More significant is Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood of Northern New England, where Planned Parenthood is challenging a New Hampshire state law that requires unmarried women under 18 to notify their parents before an abortion. Other states with similar laws have an exemption if the woman’s health is in danger, but the New Hampshire law states no such exemption.
“This one relates particularly to parental notification laws, but it could imply [by] what kind of standard or how broadly states can restrict abortion access,” said Denise Lieberman, a lecturer in political science and former director of the Eastern Missouri American Civil Liberties Union.
The outcome of this case could determine not only what status the health of the mother should have in abortion law, but also the sort of legal standard to use in reviewing abortion laws.
“[One of the issues is] balancing the rights of the fetus with the rights of the mother, particularly in this age of technology where a fetus is viable earlier and earlier.You have these other huge questions of who determines control over reproduction,” said Lieberman.
Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 case legalizing abortion, would not commit to a definition of viability.
The Court’s decision did hold it to be unconstitutional for any state to ban abortion during the first trimester, during which time the Court determined the fetus did not meet the standards of personhood and that under the right to privacy, a woman could have an abortion.
In the second trimester, the state could intervene and restrict abortion, and it could outlaw it in the third trimester.
In Oct. 2003, the U.S. House and Senate passed measures banning partial-birth abortions, essentially a procedure where a doctor partially delivers a child, then terminates it.
President Bush approved the measure, but several hours after the bill was signed into law, a federal judge blocked its enforcement in a several states. The measure is still controversial in the courts.
Death Penalty
The Supreme Court has increasingly taken on death penalty cases in recent years.
Two major decisions have been issued in the past three years, including a 2002 ban of the death penalty’s application to the mentally disabled on the grounds that it consisted of cruel and unusual punishment.
Last year, they did the same for juveniles.
“As the public becomes increasingly wary of the death penalty. . .the U.S. continues to stand out internationally as the only Western country that applies the death penalty in some of the ways we apply it [formerly, to juveniles],” said Lieberman.
There are several cases involving the death penalty before the Court.
The most prominent case is House v. Bell, where Tennessee death row inmate Paul House’s conviction for a 1985 rape-murder was called into question after new DNA evidence surfaced linking the case to the victim’s abusive husband, who had confessed to her killing.
House had used all of his appeals by the time the new evidence surfaced. This case will prove a test for new Chief Justice John Roberts, who advocated stricter laws for criminal appeals, although he also said at his confirmation that executing an innocent person would be unconstitutional.
Assisted Suicide
While suicide is not illegal in the United States, the legalities of aiding a suicide are hotly debated. Currently, the only state that allows physician-assisted suicide is Oregon, after the Death with Dignity Act was passed in 1997.
“As our population ages, the Court is going to be increasingly faced with grappling over the nature of how much the federal government can regulate medical procedures and medical care for the aging, particularly on the issues of regulation of drugs and assisted suicide,” said Lieberman.
On Oct. 5, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments for Gonzales v. Oregon, a case challenging the legality of physician-assisted suicide in Oregon.
Invoking federal narcotics laws, the Bush Administration wants to abolish the Oregon law by depriving those doctors who prescribe such lethal doses of medication of their medical licenses. At issue is not only the legality of physician-assisted suicide, but also state versus federal powers.
Traditionally, medical practice is regulated by states, while narcotics trafficking is regulated by the federal government.
“The case addresses whether federal narcotics laws can be used against doctors in Oregon who prescribe drugs in accordance with Oregon’s Death with Dignity Act, which the voters of Oregon overwhelmingly supported,” said Lieberman.
Another potential complication in this case is Justice Sandra Day O’Connor’s uncertain date of retirement, as her vote will not count if the ruling is handed down after her predecessor is confirmed. It appears that O’Connor would rule in favor of the Oregon law.
There are several types of assisted suicide. Active euthanasia involves killing a person through a direct action such as injecting a patient with a lethal dose of drugs, as Jack Kevorkian did.
Physician-assisted suicide occurs when a doctor provides a patient with the information and means (such as a lethal dose of pills) to commit suicide.
Involuntary euthanasia is killing a person who has not explicitly expressed a wish to die, but who might, for example, be in a persistent vegetative state.
Passive euthanasia or “letting die” is when means of sustaining life, such as drugs, a feeding tube or life support, are removed and the person dies as a result.
This last means of assisted suicide was in the news most recently with the controversial Terry Schiavo case.