112101 Suicide Law In Oregon Wins Round in U.S. Court
            By THE NEW YORK TIMES

            ORTLAND, Ore., Nov. 20 — A move by Attorney General John Ashcroft to 
            overturn an Oregon law permitting assisted suicide suffered a 
            setback today when a federal judge extended a restraining order 
            against it for at least four months. 
            The restraining order nullifies a Nov. 6 directive by Mr. Ashcroft 
            that authorized federal agents to act against doctors prescribing 
            lethal drugs for terminally ill patients.
            Oregon is the only state where people are allowed to kill themselves 
            with drugs prescribed by a doctor. Under the state's voter-approved 
            Death with Dignity Act, a terminally ill patient may take the lethal 
            drugs if two doctors agree that the person has less than six months 
            to live and is mentally competent to decide whether to end his life. 

            The judge, Robert E. Jones of Federal District Court, also ruled 
            that the case would move directly to a trial based on the final 
            merits, in effect skipping the preliminary injunction hearing 
            process.
            The judge asked that the State of Oregon and patients' lawyers file 
            motions for summary judgment within 60 days, after which the federal 
            government would have 30 days to respond, and the state an 
            additional 14 days to reply. After that, Judge Jones expected a 
            swift hearing and a decision within 30 days.
            In oral arguments today, lawyers for the State of Oregon, which 
            brought the suit, said Janet Reno, the attorney general during the 
            Clinton administration, had already considered the issue of federal 
            power versus state power in this matter and decided that the power 
            rested with the state and that there was no precedent for another 
            attorney general overturn that interpretation.
            They also said the federal government did not give required notice 
            of its directive or the opportunity for a public hearing.
            Lawyers for terminally ill patients who joined the suit argued that 
            the patients would bear the greatest hardship if the restraining 
            order were lifted. 
            Gregory Katsas, a lawyer from the Justice Department's headquarters 
            in Washington, argued that the case was not about regulating 
            medicine generally but regulating medicine under the Controlled 
            Substances Act.
            In his directive, Mr. Ashcroft said that "prescribing, dispensing or 
            administering federally controlled substances to assist suicide" 
            violated the act, which was passed by Congress in 1970.
            "We say that federal law controls the determination of what is 
            legitimate within the meaning of federal regulations, they say state 
            law trumps federal law," Mr. Katsas said. "No references are made to 
            state law in this statute."