736
O’Connor, J., concurring
reversed, and the case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
It is so ordered.
Justice O’Connor, concurring.* †
Death will be different for each of us. For many, the last days will be spent in physical pain and perhaps the despair that accompanies physical deterioration and a loss of control of basic bodily and mental functions. Some will seek medication to alleviate that pain and other symptoms.
The Court frames the issue in Washington v. Glucksberg as whether the Due Process Clause of the Constitution protects a "right to commit suicide which itself includes a right to assistance in doing so," ante, at 723, and concludes that our Nation's history, legal traditions, and practices do not support the existence of such a right. I join the Court's opinions because I agree that there is no generalized right to "commit suicide." But respondents urge us to address the narrower question whether a mentally competent person who is experiencing great suffering has a constitutionally cognizable interest in controlling the circumstances of his or her imminent death. I see no need to reach that question in the context of the facial challenges to the New York and Washington laws at issue here. See ibid. ("The Washington statute at issue in this case prohibits 'aid[ing] another person to attempt suicide,'. . . and, thus, the question before us is whether the 'liberty' specially protected by the Due Process Clause includes a right to commit suicide which itself includes a right to assistance in doing so"). The parties and amici agree that in these States a patient who is
*Justice Ginsburg concurs in the Court's judgments substantially for the reasons stated in this opinion. Justice Breyer joins this opinion except insofar as it joins the opinions of the Court.
†[This opinion applies also to No. 95-1858, Vacco et al. v. Quill et al., post, p. 793.]
Page: Index Previous 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 NextLast modified: October 4, 2007