News Release

Contact: Greg Eddleston - geddleston@dwd.org / (503) 228.4415

Portland, OR - Today, a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral arguments in Oregon v. Ashcroft - a continuation of the legal case that began with the Attorney General's intrusion into state regulated medical practices in November 2001.  This intrusion threatens Oregon's Death with Dignity law. 

Oregon Death with Dignity is the legal defense, public policy non-profit that formed in 1993 to help pass and defend the will of Oregon voters.  This case is about the practice of medicine in the states - not illicit drug use, trafficking or diversion as outlined under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA).  Our suit, filed on behalf of a Salem, OR, oncologist and pharmacist, advances the following principles in its case against the Ashcroft directive:

1. The explicit language of the CSA, the case law which interprets it, and the legislative record that supports is, all make clear that the Attorney General's role is to regulate the manufacture, dispensing and distribution to prevent illicit use, diversion and trafficking.  Nothing contained in the CSA gives the Attorney General authority over the practice of medicine within the individual states.

2. Ashcroft relies upon a 1984 amendment to the CSA in order to target the State of Oregon and DEA registrants practicing under the Death with Dignity law.  This amendment does not empower the Attorney General to substitute his preferred medical policies for those of the State of Oregon.

3. Attorney General Ashcroft must persuade the court not only that his interpretation of the CSA is correct, but also that it was the intent of Congress to alter the state/federal framework in this instance by permitting federal encroachment into state-regulated medical practice.

4. Attorney General Ashcroft does not allege that physicians practicing under the Oregon law are diverting drugs for illegal use.  Indeed, the Attorney General concedes that Oregon practitioners are in compliance with the Oregon law.  Thus, no law is broken, no crime committed, no community standard of care violated. 

5. The Attorney General's case is simply a policy disagreement with the State of Oregon over the practice of medicine.

A decision from the Ninth Circuit is expected in the late summer after which the losing side could appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.  Stay informed on the progress of the case online at www.dwd.org.

Attendee Bios

ELI STUTSMAN (attorney presenting oral argument) is a Portland attorney representing Dr. Peter Rasmussen and pharmacist David Hochhalter in the case against Attorney General John Ashcroft.  Stutsman is one of the principal authors of the Oregon Death with Dignity law and was the strategist behind the 1994 and 1997 electoral victories that passed the law.  Stutsman defended the law in federal court between 1994 and 1997 and has been instrumental in strategies to defend Oregon's law throughout its implementation.  Mr. Stutsman is Oregon Death with Dignity Center's Board President.

DR. PETER RASMUSSEN (plaintiff) is a Salem physician who is a plaintiff in the case against Attorney General John Ashcroft.  Rasmussen is a medical oncologist, board certified in hospice and palliative medicine and has prescribed under the Oregon Death with Dignity law. 

SCOTT SWENSON (Oregon Death with Dignity Center) is the Executive Director of the Oregon Death with Dignity Center.  Oregon Death with Dignity is supporting the case of the physician and pharmacist against the Ashcroft edict and also works to defend and promote Oregon's law nationally.

LOUIS COLEMAN HALL (Secretary, AUTONOMY) has been active with ADAPT, Chicago, where he worked on transit issues, and he participated in the national disability rally in Washington, D.C. to enact the ADA in 1990. He has served on the Board of the Oregon Paralyzed Veterans of America (OPVA), and has served as coordinator of volunteers of the OPVA's homeless veterans project. He also organized and coordinated the Sixth Anniversary Celebration of the ADA in Portland, Oregon in 1996.

>> back to top

home | search | site guide | contact us | privacy policy