Great Moments in Federalism Part LVIX

Oregon’s assisted suicide law was essentially upheld by a 6-3 Supreme Court (Kennedy majority opinion [pdf]), by invalidating an “Interpretive Rule” issued by then AG John Ashcroft, which sought to invalidate the Oregon law by interpreting the Controlled Substance Act to prohibit doctors from prescribing drugs that assisted in suicide because they had “no medical purpose.”
Kennedy issues a harsh rebuke the hacktacular and overreaching Ashcroft, assailing his “lack of expertise in this area and the apparent absence of any consultation with anyone outside the Department of Justice who might aid in a reasoned judgment.”
As important as this opinion is, and it’s nice to have a state law on assisted suicide withstand such a creative and concerted attack by the White House, it may be most notable for its dissenters–Scalia, Thomas, and Roberts. We’re going to have to get used to seeing those three names lumped together on social conservative cause issues, which apparently pose no ethical obstruction to legally conservative values, like Federalism. Not that Federalism has been trumpeted a whole lot during this administration (probably because Bush has managed to create the biggest government ever), but it’s yet another example of buffet style legal principle picking by the Supreme Court’s ‘strict constructionists’. Not that both sides don’t do it–but if one side is going to be repeatedly lauded for its legal principles, it’s about time those principles were accurately identified as social conservatism rather than the array of bullshit buzzwords and baseball analogies that we’re instead fed. Look forward to seeing Alito’s name tacked onto this dissent list, which may become a majority roster before long.