Neil Gorsuch on Euthanasia

Neil Gorsuch has written extensively, most notably in his 2006 book, The Future of Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia, presenting a core stance that opposes both euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide, viewing them as morally identical acts of intentional killing by private persons. He champions the "inviolability-of-life principle," asserting that all human beings are intrinsically valuable and that intentionally taking a life is always wrong. The judge sharply criticizes real-world applications in places like Oregon and the Netherlands, citing evidence of potential abuse, overreach, and motivations beyond the alleviation of suffering, suggesting legalization could pressure vulnerable populations like the poor and elderly.

He builds his argument by distinguishing assisted suicide from the constitutionally recognized right to refuse unwanted medical treatment, centering this distinction on the element of intent. While Gorsuch maintains that his personal views would not dictate judicial rulings, his writings argue that autonomy-based reasoning, exemplified in cases like Planned Parenthood v. Casey, is flawed because it leads to an overbroad protection of personal liberty that could invalidate all prohibitions on private consensual acts. His 'middle path' allows patients to refuse treatment or receive palliative care, even if death results, provided the intent is to relieve pain, not to cause death.