Washington v. Glucksberg
Significance, Washington Law Challenged, Jack Kevorkian, Further Readings
State of Washington
That Washington's ban on assisting or aiding a suicide does not violate the Due Process Clause of the Constitution.
Chief Lawyer for Petitioner
William L. Williams, Senior Assistant Attorney General of Washington
Chief Lawyer for Respondent
Kathryn L. Tucker
Justices for the Court
Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Anthony M. Kennedy, Sandra Day O'Connor, William H. Rehnquist (writing for the Court), Antonin Scalia, David H. Souter, John Paul Stevens, Clarence Thomas
Date of Decision
26 June 1997
That Washington's ban on assisted suicide does not violate the constitutional rights of terminally ill patients.
- Moore v. East Cleveland, 431 U.S. 494 (1977).
- Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Department of Health, 497 U.S. 261 (1990).
Cheyfitz, Kirk. "He Breaks His Own Rules: Kevorkian Rushes to Fulfill His Clients' Desire to Die." Detroit Free Press, 3 March 1997.
- Whren v. United States - Significance, A Routine Traffic Stop?, Lower Court Rulings, Use Of Pretext To Enable A Search
- Waneta Hoyt Trial: 1995 - Searching For The Truth, The Trial, Suggestions For Further Reading
- Washington v. Glucksberg - Significance
- Washington v. Glucksberg - Further Readings
- Washington v. Glucksberg - Washington Law Challenged
- Washington v. Glucksberg - Jack Kevorkian
- Other Free Encyclopedias