The Supreme Court recently ruled that the federal Controlled Substances Act does not apply to Oregon’s assisted suicide statutes, thus allowing the physician-assisted suicides to proceed in the state without interference from the U.S. Justice Department.
As noted by New York Times’ writers Timothy Egan and Adam Liptak, the ruling is “narrow and technical” and does not recognize a right to suicide. However, by preventing the Justice Department from stretching its authority, the ruling makes two positive steps. It protects federalism, one of the best features of American government, and creates a jurisdiction where physician-assisted suicide is legal.
Federalism divides sovereign power between the states and the federal government. In principle, the federal government and the states each have certain spheres of power. Some of the areas, like taxation, overlap. Others are supposed to be the exclusive domain of either the states or the federal government. Historically, the states’ powers have suffered as the federal government’s have increased-not necessarily a good thing.
While large, expensive projects such as the national defense and diplomacy and protection of established legal rights are naturally national responsibilities, smaller or more focused projects and newer or less widely accepted ideas and methods in government better fit the states. State governments are more accessible than the federal government and, ideally, respond faster to problems because they have less bureaucratic inertia and fewer viewpoints to compromise over. Also, they tend to reflect regional views better, allowing Americans to both benefit from the overarching protections of the federal government while enjoying the convenience of state governments tailored to their local lifestyles and customs.
Having state governments that do not necessarily follow the federal line also allows new ideas in government to be tested on a limited basis. If an idea is successful, other states or possibly the federal government may adopt it as well.
Too often, reformers in government have no real world evidence to support their good theories, leaving voters and lawmakers with no way to discern which ideas will improve the nation and which will harm it.
Instead of listening to the talking heads, their partisan debates and endless rhetoric on FoxNews and CNN, we can test new ideas in the real world. Women’s suffrage and interracial marriage are two formerly controversial ideas that are now unquestioned. Both began in single states and spread as practice proved their validity.
Currently, several controversial issues can be addressed by allowing the individual states to try the waters: legalization of marijuana, same sex marriage and civil unions, socialized medicine and assisted suicide. Overall, assisted suicide is a reasonable concept and should not be subject to government ban. Oregon will serve as a test case for refining how the law can best address the concept.
The idea of government making suicide illegal is absurd. Governments exist to protect an individual’s rights from infringement by others-not by self limitation. While I agree that suicide is immoral, the government’s place is not to dictate moral and immoral but to guarantee that each of us may act in what we believe to be a moral fashion. Because suicide does not limit anyone else’s moral choices, the government should not ban suicide.
Assisted suicide, however, is a somewhat different manner. If someone asks for help in suicide, particularly if he lacks the ability-possibly through paralysis-to kill himself, then assistance from someone not morally opposed to suicide makes sense. However, any statute that differentiates assisted suicide from murder is potentially subject to abuse. Murders could be disguised as assisted suicides. Extensive, hard to counterfeit documentation is necessary to protect people from misunderstandings or deliberate murders. Many other issues surround assisted suicide. If a person is in debt or has other obligations, such as minor children, should she be allowed to kill herself? Should doctors be the only one’s allowed to assist in suicide? To what extent should a suicide assistant be certified and licensed? All of the questions require evidence and real world experience to answer wisely. Oregon will provide the knowledge necessary to allow other states to implement assisted suicide as best as possible.
In checking the Justice Department’s attempt to prohibit assisted suicide in Oregon, the Supreme Court is allowing federalism to function at its best: helping the people learn the best way to govern.
Oregon, by its voters’ choice, will provide the first testing ground for a controversial new idea in American government.