The fight to secure access to medical aid-in-dying continues

Judy Govatos has lived with cancer for over a decade. Now, at 81, she recently learned her lymphoma has returned for the third time. 

“I don’t want to die fearfully,” Judy says. “I want to die affirming the fact that I’ve had this opportunity to be alive in this amazing world, and to say goodbye and I love you to my family and friends.”

A longtime medical aid-in-dying advocate, Judy is also a plaintiff in Compassion & Choices’ lawsuit asserting that the residency requirement in New Jersey’s aid-in-dying law violates the U.S. Constitution’s guarantee of equal treatment. 

This lawsuit, and the state of New Jersey’s response, highlights the ongoing battle Compassion & Choices’ End-of-Life Justice Center is fighting to ensure medical aid in dying is available to all qualified patients, regardless of their ZIP code. 

“Does the state have the right to reserve medical aid in dying to its own residents?”

Residency restrictions remain a significant barrier for many seeking to access medical aid in dying. It is the lone care option for which a patient’s state residency determines whether a clinician can provide it to them. 

Since Compassion & Choices filed a lawsuit challenging New Jersey’s residency requirement for medical aid in dying, a federal judge ruled in August 2023 that the residency mandate in the state’s law does not violate the U.S. Constitution. 

Compassion & Choices is appealing that decision, and a September 2025 story in Law360 details the most recent hearing in which the Third Circuit considered whether our case has standing. 

As Law 360 describes, the state of New Jersey is arguing that because Judy does not yet have a six-month prognosis, and is therefore not yet eligible to use medical aid in dying, she lacks standing to sue the state. 

The article quotes Compassion & Choices’ legal partner Ryan Chabot’s response: 

“It can’t be the case that the only period of time when this law could be challenged … is in the narrow six-month window between when somebody is at death’s door … and mootness,” said Ryan Chabot of WilmerHale, counsel for Govatos and New Jersey physician Paul Bryman.

According to the article, despite the procedural arguments brought by the state of New Jersey, the ultimate question before the court is a constitutional one: “Does the state have the right to reserve medical aid in dying to its own residents?” 

Overcoming obstacles to care

First-hand experience from doctors and patients, and decades of data, show that residency restrictions function more as a barrier to access than a safeguard. 

For Judy Govatos, the residency mandate in New Jersey’s law means that she can’t even start end-of-life planning conversations with a New Jersey physician, which should happen well before a six-month prognosis if possible. 

For Judy’s co-plaintiff, Dr. Paul Bryman of New Jersey, the residency restriction has increased the burden and risk of treating out-of-state patients. 

For both, the option of medical aid in dying “implicates profound rights involving bodily autonomy and end-of-life decision-making,” as the article describes. 

“The option of medical aid in dying is not about giving up on life,” Judy says. “Instead, it allows people like me to have more full, more active, more good days, more fully involved in life.”

Now we wait to learn the Third Circuit’s decision. According to Law360, the judges “acknowledged the weight of the questions before them, which implicate not only state regulatory authority but also core constitutional principles governing equality, autonomy and the movement of people across state lines.”

Meanwhile, Compassion & Choices continues to fight to ensure that all individuals can access the end-of-life options that are right for them, regardless of where they live. 

Learn more about Compassion Legal and our work at CandC.org/legal-advocacy. If you or someone you love is struggling to get the care you want and deserve, we are here to help. Call us today at 800-247-7421 or use our legal intake form.