Case Name: Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Department of Health
Year: Argued 1989 ; Decided 1990
Result: 5-4 in favor of Director, Missouri Department of Health
Related Constitutional Issue/ Amendment: 14th Amendment dealing with the Due Process Clause
Civil Rights or Civil Liberties: Civil Liberties
Significance/ Precedent: The Court held that while individuals enjoyed the right to refuse medical treatment under the Due Process Clause, incompetent persons were not able to exercise such rights. Cruzan is the first case in which the Supreme Court of the United States had to decide on the issue of ‘‘right to die’’ under the U.S. Constitution. The Court validated Missouri’s claimed interest in ‘‘the protection and preservation of human life’’ and approved the requirement of ‘‘clear and convincing’’ evidence to prevent potential abuses that might result harsh erroneous decisions.
Quote from Majority Opinion: “the right of a competent individual to refuse medical treatment is a 'constitutionally protected liberty interest' under the Fourteenth Amendment. [The] Fourteenth Amendment provides that no State shall 'deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.' The Court agreed that to deny a person the right to refuse medical treatment that results in long term misery would deprive the person of their constitutional liberty.”
6-Word Summary: withdrawal of treatment requires convincing evidence
Year: Argued 1989 ; Decided 1990
Result: 5-4 in favor of Director, Missouri Department of Health
Related Constitutional Issue/ Amendment: 14th Amendment dealing with the Due Process Clause
Civil Rights or Civil Liberties: Civil Liberties
Significance/ Precedent: The Court held that while individuals enjoyed the right to refuse medical treatment under the Due Process Clause, incompetent persons were not able to exercise such rights. Cruzan is the first case in which the Supreme Court of the United States had to decide on the issue of ‘‘right to die’’ under the U.S. Constitution. The Court validated Missouri’s claimed interest in ‘‘the protection and preservation of human life’’ and approved the requirement of ‘‘clear and convincing’’ evidence to prevent potential abuses that might result harsh erroneous decisions.
Quote from Majority Opinion: “the right of a competent individual to refuse medical treatment is a 'constitutionally protected liberty interest' under the Fourteenth Amendment. [The] Fourteenth Amendment provides that no State shall 'deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.' The Court agreed that to deny a person the right to refuse medical treatment that results in long term misery would deprive the person of their constitutional liberty.”
6-Word Summary: withdrawal of treatment requires convincing evidence