Brief Argues Court’s Unwarranted Assumptions Led to Incorrect Ruling

Compassion & Choices Friday filed the opening brief in its appeal of a federal judge’s September ruling upholding the residency requirement of New Jersey’s medical aid-in-dying law. The brief asserts that the District Court wrongly dismissed the plaintiffs’ claims that the law’s residency requirement violates the U.S. Constitution’s Privileges & Immunities Clause, Dormant Commerce Clause, and Equal Protection Clause by “…going outside the pleadings, resolving disputed facts, and drawing inferences against Plaintiffs.”

“Access to medical aid in dying is a critically important option for all terminally ill people who wish to receive healthcare in the state of New Jersey,” said Amitai Heller, senior staff attorney for Compassion & Choices. “This appeal asks for assurance that Ms. Govatos and Dr. Bryman be allowed to present and elicit evidence that allows them to put forward their best case.” 

“I’ve advocated for years to simply ensure that my final days will be defined by peace without needless suffering. I hope the court will reconsider their ruling and give me a chance to speak for myself,” said Judy Govatos, patient plaintiff and Wilmington resident with incurable stage-4 lymphoma.

Background on Govatos et. al v. Murphy

Filed in August 2023, Govatos et. al v. Murphy asserted that the residency requirement of New Jersey’s medical aid-in-dying law violates the Privileges and Immunities Clause, the Dormant Commerce Clause, and the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution. The case was filed on behalf of Judy Govatos, a Delaware resident with incurable stage-4 lymphoma and Dr. Paul Bryman, a New Jersey-based physician. 

A federal judge ruled in September 2024 that the residency requirement was constitutional. Compassion & Choices appealed in October, asserting that the residency mandate violates the U.S. Constitution by denying non-residents access to this compassionate end-of-life option solely based on their state of residence.

The New Jersey lawsuit is the third in the nation to challenge a medical aid-in-dying law’s residency requirement. Ten jurisdictions nationwide have passed medical aid-in-dying laws with a residency mandate (California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Vermont, Washington, and Washington, D.C.). But two states have removed the residency requirement following legal challenges by Compassion & Choices. In 2022, the end-of-life care advocacy group successfully settled a similar federal lawsuit in Oregon, resulting in the suspension of that state’s residency requirement. In March, Compassion & Choices settled a similar federal lawsuit in Vermont.Vermont and Oregon updated their medical aid-in-dying laws to remove the residency requirement in May and July 2023, respectively.

Donor and Supporter Privacy Policy — Contact
Texting Privacy Policy
Media Contacts
It's Not Assisted Suicide