On February 6, 2015, the Supreme Court issued a unanimous, per curiam opinion finding the criminal law against assisted suicide (section 241 of the Criminal Code) unconstitutional. Reversing its 1993 judgment in R. v. Rodriguez, the Court held that the law violates the life, liberty and security of the person interests guaranteed under section 7 of the Charter; that the law trenches on the principle of fundamental justice known as “overbreadth”; and that it cannot be saved as a “reasonable limit” under the Charter‘s section 1. The Court rejected, however, arguments that the law discriminates against persons with disabilities; and that the provinces are entitled to “interjurisdictional immunity” to the extent that they wish to facilitate medical aid in dying in a manner that conflicts with federal criminal law.
Carter is a rare kind of “constitutional moment”. It will take time to fully absorb its implications. Even if it does not advance new understandings of law (it relies heavily, for example, on last year’s ruling in Bedford), the decision instantly joins the select group of Charter cases – like Morgentaler and Big M Drug Mart – that we turn to to define our rights and liberties.
I did an intense amount of media on Carter. A few links below (and apologies if some of them go dead after a few weeks!)
CBC’s The National segment setting up the decision the day before.
CTV’s Power Play with Don Martin. (Link can be found on page 4 of right sidebar)
My op-ed in the Ottawa Citizen.
My interview with Power Play on October 15, 2014, the day that Carter was actually heard.
Excerpt from my op ed:
On assisted suicide, the Supreme Court issues a call to action
“What I fear is a death that negates, as opposed to concludes, my life. I do not want to die slowly, piece by piece.” The late Gloria Taylor uttered those words in the wake of her 2009 diagnosis of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). With exquisite and painful frankness, Taylor gave voice to thousands of Canadians who suffer from serious and incapacitating conditions. For many, their final act of agency consists of choosing, with the assistance of a willing physician, the timing of their death.
For decades, that act of self-determination has been foreclosed by the criminal code’s ban on assisted suicide in section 241. …
The topic of assisted suicide engenders sincere and passionately opposing views. Some in the disability rights community have expressed fears that the practice undermines the worth and value of their lived experience. The best way to address those fears is to structure a system in which competent choice is respected, while coercion and pressure remains scrupulously monitored. The court suspended the effect of its ruling, giving Parliament a year to consider the issue. Parliament needs to honour the legacy of Gloria Taylor, and take up the challenge.”