Facts

Knowing that she may lose the option to take aid-in-dying medication in the future due to a neurodegenerative disease that would eventually kill her, Sandra Morris filed suit, along with her physician, Dr. Lonny Shavelson and others, to extend options currently unavailable to those seeking to end their life. California's End of Life Option Act (ELOA) provides certain terminally-ill Californians with the option to end their life with the help of aid-in-dying medication. The requirements are stringent, including that those wishing to end their life be able to administer the medication on their own, without assistance. Because in California, it is illegal to aid, advise, or encourage another to commit suicide, ELOA grants criminal and civil immunity to prescribing physicians. Accordingly, the immunity is only extended to qualified individuals who prepare "the aid in dying drug," but not for those assisting them "in ingesting" the drug. Morris filed the lawsuit in USDC Northern against Robert Bonta, in his official capacity as the State Attorney General.

PLAINTIFFS' CONTENTIONS: Plaintiffs asserted that the End of Life Option Act violated the Americans with Disabilities Act, as those with disabilities may not be able to meet the stringent EOLA option of ability to administer the drug without assistance, thus discriminating individuals with physical disabilities. Moreover, those facing certain terminal illnesses are particularly affected as they must choose between acting sooner or risk the ability to take the medication and endure the prolonged dying they sought to avoid.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS: Defendants asserted that plaintiffs, especially the physicians, lacked standing as they failed to allege a concrete, particularized and actual or imminent injury nor could plaintiffs' injury be redressed through judicial relief.

Result

The court granted defendant's motion to dismiss, reasoning in part that the legislature wanted to ensure that the act of administering the aid-in-dying medication was voluntary and the most effective protection as such was the requirement that the person administer the medication themselves.

Other Information

The case is being appealed to the Ninth Circuit.