cannabisnews.com: Ashcroft Wants Oregon Suicide Law Blocked Ashcroft Wants Oregon Suicide Law Blocked Posted by CN Staff on November 10, 2004 at 09:26:04 PT By David G. Savage, Times Staff Writer Source: Los Angeles Times Washington -- Seeking to void the nation's only "right to die" law, outgoing Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft asked the Supreme Court on Tuesday to give federal agents the authority to punish Oregon doctors who help dying patients end their lives.The Bush administration's top legal officer said that federal drug laws trumped the state's traditional control over the practice of medicine. Ashcroft is appealing the rulings of two lower courts, which held that Oregon has a right to regulate its doctors. The case is the second before the high court this year in which the administration is challenging West Coast voters on matters of individual liberty and personal privacy.The court on Nov. 29 will hear the case of Ashcroft vs. Raich, in which the Justice Department is seeking legal authority to raid the residences of those who use home-grown marijuana to relieve their pain. It is a challenge to California's pioneering 1996 law that allows the use of marijuana for medical purposes.Two years before the California law won approval, Oregon's voters passed the nation's first and only "right to die" measure. Known as the Death with Dignity Act, it allows doctors to prescribe lethal medications to terminally ill patients who wish to hasten their deaths.The law is popular in Oregon, but rarely used. Since 1997, 171 people have used medication to end their lives, the state has reported. Most of them had cancer.Social conservatives opposed to the law sought federal intervention. They argued that the use of medication to bring about death, rather than to save lives, violated the federal Controlled Substances Act. Doctors who prescribe drugs for such a purpose should lose their licenses to write prescriptions, they said.In 1998, then-Atty. Gen. Janet Reno and the Clinton administration rebuffed a move by Rep. Henry J. Hyde (R-Ill.) and Ashcroft — at the time a Republican senator from Missouri — to take action against Oregon's doctors. Snipped:Complete Article: http://www.freedomtoexhale.com/blocked.htmSource: Los Angeles Times (CA) Author: David G. Savage, Times Staff WriterPublished: November 10, 2004Copyright: 2004 Los Angeles TimesContact: letters latimes.comWebsite: http://www.latimes.com/Related Articles & Web Sites:Raich vs. Ashcroft http://www.angeljustice.org/Angel Raich v. Ashcroft Newshttp://freedomtoexhale.com/raich.htmAshcroft's Mixed Legacyhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread19793.shtmlState Backs Medical Pot Case Before Court http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread19640.shtmlKey Medical Pot Case To Be Heardhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread19092.shtmlOur Big Brother, John Ashcrofthttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread14809.shtml Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help Comment #14 posted by FoM on November 10, 2004 at 20:48:13 PT Off Topic Arafat has died. I hope the transition goes ok. [ Post Comment ] Comment #13 posted by FoM on November 10, 2004 at 20:13:21 PT Related Article from The Star Tribune Editorial: Attorney General, A Change -- But How Much? November 11, 2004Those who were relieved to see John Ashcroft's resignation accepted by President Bush enjoyed less than a day of relief before Alberto Gonzales was chosen to replace him as U.S. attorney general. If Ashcroft was associated with executive secrecy, radical views and strained legal arguments during his time in the Bush administration, Gonzales has been right up there with him -- on all three issues -- as White House counsel. Ashcroft's exit is indeed welcome. From his personal comments to his official actions, he racked up a long litany of offenses to civil liberties, to openness in government and to a plain reading of law. Particularly since the attacks of 9/11, his tack has been one of overreaching, of disdain for international law and of indifference to the rights of numerous groups including detainees, dissenters, protesters and immigrants. Three months after 9/11 he told the Senate Judiciary Committee that criticism of government tactics "only aids terrorists." He called librarians concerned about expanded FBI surveillance power "hysterics." He made an appalling -- and false -- charge during his appearance before the 9/11 commission last April against commission member Jamie Gorelick, accusing her of writing legal memos while in the Clinton administration that were the "single greatest structural cause for the Sept. 11 problem." In the war on terrorism, his Justice Department botched prosecutions, touted Patriot Act provisions that courts have found unconstitutional and refused to cooperate with Senate Judiciary Committee requests for documents in its investigation of the Abu Ghraib scandal.In the more routine areas of justice, he took radical views, which led to radical official actions on such issues as the Second Amendment and abortion. He even tried to punish doctors who prescribed medical marijuana in states allowing its use.Gonzales, once thought to be a likely Supreme Court pick, is not the personal lightning rod that the nation has come to see in Ashcroft. But he has been directly involved in some of the Bush administration's most egregious interpretations of law, actions which have resulted in the flouting of the Geneva Conventions and which have cost the United States respect at home and abroad. It was Gonzales who wrote the January 2002 memo to Bush in which he urged the president to declare that the Geneva Conventions on Prisoners of War did not apply to the United States' war against the Taliban and Al-Qaida. The reasoning? Because doing so would "substantially reduce the threat of domestic criminal prosecution under the War Crimes Act."He stated flatly that the war on terrorism "in my judgment renders obsolete Geneva's strict limitations on questioning of enemy prisoners." His concern was that the United States might want to use interrogation techniques that would be seen as torture. The world now knows that torture techniques were indeed used since that memo, at Guantanamo and elsewhere.Gonzales' arguments for presidential secrecy and heightened presidential power are also beyond worrisome, and his commitment to the rule of law is as suspect as Ashcroft's. What an irony for the highest Justice official in the land.Copyright: 2004 Star Tribunehttp://www.startribune.com/stories/561/5079558.html [ Post Comment ] Comment #12 posted by The GCW on November 10, 2004 at 18:35:30 PT Oregon Wants Ashcroft Blocked How Ashcroft got His job is a revealing story in itself.Unable to win His election bid against a candidate that died, in Missouri, Bush gives Him the job...Missouri took a strong message and put it in Ashcroft et al.'s face; the disobedient Christian wrong may have had a tantrum, and told Bush to give the turkey a job... But Bush has a knack for hiring goons. And look who appears. [ Post Comment ] Comment #11 posted by Sam Adams on November 10, 2004 at 15:54:09 PT Don I'll have to look for that - in the past year National Geographic magazine has also had great articles on Saudi Arabia and also Qatar.In Saudia Arabia, homosexuality and drug violations are punishable by death! No wonder the neo-cons like them so much. [ Post Comment ] Comment #10 posted by dongenero on November 10, 2004 at 15:17:53 PT Sam Adams-worlds colliding There was an excellent special feature on CNN the other night about Saudi Arabia.Sam, your comments reminded me of that program. Some there are pushing for reforms to a more tolerant, secular society but they are few. The Wahabi flavoring of Islam is very strong presence there,(think evangelical, fundamental, right wing religion). They talk about the need for strong morals and they have "morality police" walking the shopping malls looking for infractions.The parallels with our particular flavoring of fundamental religious proponents is fascinating. Recommended viewing to be sure. I am hopeful that many people who voted Bush in based on "morals", would watch it. They definitely NEED to see this. [ Post Comment ] Comment #9 posted by siege on November 10, 2004 at 12:51:16 PT Calif.... the right to die: Calif..working up a law there know for the state [ Post Comment ] Comment #8 posted by Sam Adams on November 10, 2004 at 12:25:21 PT the right to die It's interesting, I saw in the paper this morning that Yassir Arafat is pretty much gone, sinking deeper and deeper into coma. However, the article said that he will be kept alive as long as physically possible: Islam does not allow the removal of life support!I paused for a second: is this Middle East, or the US Southeast? What's the difference?Is it really any surprise that the Christian fundamentalist USA and the middle eastern world of Islam are colliding? It's a marriage made in heaven. We sought each other out like lovers on the dance floor. We share so many interests! I suppose human history has always been this way. Violent reactionaries need each other to exploit the peaceful, hard-working, intellectual people.How would Osama Bin Laden have looked if the US spent $200 billion rebuilding Afganistan into the jewel of the Arab world, instead of attacking Iraq? Something tells me Osama would have lost most of his audience and funders. [ Post Comment ] Comment #7 posted by FoM on November 10, 2004 at 11:27:31 PT Press Release from The ACLU ACLU Urges Supreme Court to Uphold Privacy Rights in Police-Dog Case November 10, 2004 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: media aclu.org Traffic Stops Are Not A License for Criminal Investigations, Civil Liberties Group Says WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court today heard arguments in a case that will determine whether police must have individualized suspicion before using drug-sniffing dogs during routine traffic stops. "The deployment of drug-sniffing dogs cannot be justified by the legitimate investigative needs of a routine traffic stop," said Steven R. Shapiro, Legal Director of the American Civil Liberties Union. "A trained dog will add nothing to the evidence of a broken tail-light nor assist in determining how fast a motorist was driving. It is, however, an invitation to racial profiling"The ACLU submitted a friend-of-the-court brief in the case on behalf of Roy Caballes, a 36-year-old Las Vegas resident who was charged with marijuana trafficking in Illinois in 1999. Caballes, who was en route to Chicago, was pulled over by a state trooper for driving six miles above the speed limit. While the trooper was issuing Caballes a warning ticket, a second trooper, who had not been called, arrived and began walking a canine unit around the car. The dog discovered marijuana in the trunk and Caballes was arrested and later sentenced to 12 years in prison. On November 20, 2003, the Illinois Supreme Court overturned the sentence and ruled that the use of a drug-detection dog during a legitimate traffic stop violated Caballes’ constitutional rights. In its brief, the ACLU urges the Supreme Court to uphold the lower court’s ruling, stating that the Fourth Amendment does not allow for police to convert a routine traffic stop into an intrusive drug investigation. The ACLU also said that the use of dogs during routine stops frightens motorists and alters the interaction between law enforcement and the motorist. "Millions of people in the United States drive automobiles every day, and most of them, from time to time, drive a few miles over the speed limit," said Harvey Grossman, Legal Director of the ACLU of Illinois. "Drivers understand that they can be ticketed or fined for traffic infractions, but they do not expect to be treated as drug suspects without any reason in full view of other motorists on the side of the road." The ACLU brief also pointed out that police dogs are intimidating to most people and far from foolproof in their ability to detect drugs, especially when they are utilized in the absence of any basis for suspicion. For more information on this case, Illinois v. Caballes, go to: http://www.aclu.org/court/court.cfm?ID=16575&c=286 [ Post Comment ] Comment #6 posted by FoM on November 10, 2004 at 11:04:52 PT dr slider Yes isn't that something else? This is not good. [ Post Comment ] Comment #5 posted by dr slider on November 10, 2004 at 10:44:57 PT: how 'bout my lawyer? Check out http://msnbc.com/id/4999734. An '02 newsweek article illustrating Gonzales' work for the pres. insuring he will never be held accountable for his war crimes.Big surprise Bush'd want his personal legal counsel running the "Justice" Department [ Post Comment ] Comment #4 posted by E_Johnson on November 10, 2004 at 10:05:03 PT Grrrrrr Janet Reno "In 1998, then-Atty. Gen. Janet Reno and the Clinton administration rebuffed a move by Rep. Henry J. Hyde (R-Ill.) and Ashcroft — at the time a Republican senator from Missouri — to take action against Oregon's doctors."So in Janet Reno's mind, Peter McWilliams was an assisted suicide?That woman better not cross my path or I will give her a piece of my mind. [ Post Comment ] Comment #3 posted by FoM on November 10, 2004 at 09:56:39 PT Gonzales to Replace Ashcroft WASHINGTON — White House counsel Alberto Gonzales has been chosen by President Bush to be the next attorney general, U.S. officials confirmed to FOX News on Wednesday. An announcement from the White House could come later Wednesday. Complete Article: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,138160,00.html [ Post Comment ] Comment #2 posted by FoM on November 10, 2004 at 09:51:12 PT Bush Taps Gonzales for Attorney General By Corbett B. Daly November 10, 2004 WASHINGTON (CBS.MW) -- President Bush has tapped White House counsel Alberto Gonzales to replace John Ashcroft as the nation's top law enforcement official, sources have told CBS News.Ashcroft and Commerce Secretary Don Evans announced their resignations late Tuesday, and Gonzales' appointment would mark the first major change in the administration since Bush secured a second term last week.If confirmed by the Senate, Gonzales would become the first Hispanic attorney general in U.S. history. Gonzales had also been mentioned as a possible choice for the Supreme Court, if a vacancy arose.Chief Justice William Rehnquist was diagnosed last month with thyroid cancer and has not reported to work in subsequent weeks.Gonzales, a longtime confidantSee full story. of President Bush, has drawn fire for his role in a 2002 memo proclaiming that the president had the right to waive laws prohibiting torture. Copyright: 1997-2004 MarketWatch.com, Inc. http://www.investors.com/breakingnews.asp?journalid=23929682&brk=1 [ Post Comment ] Comment #1 posted by FoM on November 10, 2004 at 09:44:41 PT Related Articles Exit Ashcroft: http://www.counterpunch.org/whitney11102004.htmlThe Fundamental John Ashcroft: http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/2002/03/ashcroft.html [ Post Comment ] Post Comment