1. Gabriella Shook

2.  Plaintiff- State of Oregon  Defendant- Attorney General John Ashcroft, then Alberto Gonzales http://www.deathwithdignity. org/historyfacts/gonzalesvore gon

3.  Controlled Substances Act 1970  Death with Dignity Act 1994 http://www.worldmag.com/2006/02/life_changing_decisions

4.  Did the Controlled Substances Act authorize the attorney general to ban the use of controlled substances for physician-assisted suicide in Oregon?

5.  District ruled in favor of the Plaintiff  Ashcroft overstepped his authority  Appeals ruled in favor of the Plaintiff  Ashcroft’s decision unconstitutional  State’s rights

6.  Gonzales replaced Ashcroft  Agreed that Ashcroft’s directive was consistent with the intentions of the Controlled Substances Act  Federal uniformity vs. state sovereignty

7.  Ashcroft/Gonzales supporters:  To restrain misuse of prescriptions, must ban assisted suicide  Oregon’s argument:  Ashcroft had no authority under Controlled Substances Act  Legitimate medical purpose  Majority of Americans agree with assisted suicide  State choice, not federal

8.  Majority (6):  Justice Anthony Kennedy  CSA regulated drug misuse, not medical practices  Dissenting (3):  Justice Thomas  Gonzales v. Raich: CSA regulates how drugs are used; if only intended to rid of addictive drugs, then marijuana should be legal; contradicts case of Gonzales v. Oregon  Ashcroft reasonable interpretation

9.  State debate  Montana, Washington, Vermont  Brittany Maynard  29  Terminal brain cancer-6 months  Loss of cognitive and motor skills

10.  “Gonzales v. Oregon (formerly Oregon v. Ashcroft) (04- 623),” Cornell University Law School: Legal Information Institute; available from http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/cert/04-623; Internet; accessed 18 November 2014.  "GONZALES v. OREGON," The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law, accessed November 24, 2014, http://www.oyez.org/cases/2000- 2009/2005/2005_04_623.http://www.oyez.org/cases/2000- 2009/2005/2005_04_623  “The Supreme Court of the United States,” Supreme Court of the United States; available from http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/05pdf/04-623.pdf; Internet; accessed 18 November 2014.