Washington v. Glucksberg, 521 U.S. 702 (1997)

Full Answer Section

The Court held that the right to assisted suicide is not a fundamental right protected by the Due Process Clause. The Court reasoned that the right to assisted suicide is not deeply rooted in the nation's history and traditions, and that it is not implicit in the concept of ordered liberty.

The Court also noted that there is no consensus among the states on the issue of assisted suicide. At the time of the decision, only two states had legalized assisted suicide. The Court concluded that the lack of consensus among the states suggests that the right to assisted suicide is not a fundamental right.

In addition to its analysis of the Due Process Clause, the Court also considered the state's interest in protecting life. The Court held that the state has a legitimate interest in preventing suicide, even when the suicide is assisted. The Court reasoned that suicide is a serious public health problem, and that the state has a duty to protect its citizens from harm.

The Court's decision in Washington v. Glucksberg has been criticized by some who argue that the right to assisted suicide is a fundamental right protected by the Due Process Clause. However, the Court's decision remains the law of the land.

In conclusion, the US Supreme Court analyzed the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment when it held that it is constitutional to criminalize assisted suicide. The Court held that the right to assisted suicide is not a fundamental right protected by the Due Process Clause, and that the state has a legitimate interest in protecting life.

Sample Answer