546US2
Unit: $U18
[09-04-08 12:21:03] PAGES PGT: OPIN
OCTOBER TERM, 2005
243
Syllabus
GONZALES, ATTORNEY GENERAL, et al. v.
OREGON et al.
certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the ninth circuit No. 04–623. Argued October 5, 2005—Decided January 17, 2006 The Controlled Substances Act (CSA or Act), which was enacted in 1970 with the main objectives of combating drug abuse and controlling legiti mate and illegitimate traffic in controlled substances, criminalizes, inter alia, the unauthorized distribution and dispensation of substances clas sified in any of its five schedules. The Attorney General may add, re move, or reschedule substances only after making particular findings, and on scientific and medical matters, he must accept the findings of the Secretary of Health and Human Services (Secretary). These proceed ings must be on the record after an opportunity for comment. The dispute here involves controlled substances listed in Schedule II, which are generally available only by written prescription, 21 U. S. C. § 829(a). A 1971 regulation promulgated by the Attorney General requires that such prescriptions be used “for a legitimate medical purpose by an indi vidual practitioner acting in the usual course of his professional prac tice.” 21 CFR § 1306.04. To prevent diversion of controlled sub stances, the CSA regulates the activity of physicians, who must register in accordance with rules and regulations promulgated by the Attorney General. He may deny, suspend, or revoke a registration that, as rele vant here, would be “inconsistent with the public interest.” 21 U. S. C. §§ 824(a)(4), 822(a)(2). In determining consistency with the public inter est, he must consider five factors, including the State’s recommendation, compliance with state, federal, and local law regarding controlled sub stances, and “public health and safety.” § 823(f). The CSA explicitly contemplates a role for the States in regulating controlled substances. See § 903. The Oregon Death With Dignity Act (ODWDA) exempts from civil or criminal liability state-licensed physicians who, in compliance with ODWDA’s specific safeguards, dispense or prescribe a lethal dose of drugs upon the request of a terminally ill patient. In 2001, the Attor ney General issued an Interpretive Rule to address the implementation and enforcement of the CSA with respect to ODWDA, declaring that using controlled substances to assist suicide is not a legitimate medical practice and that dispensing or prescribing them for this purpose is unlawful under the CSA. The State, a physician, a pharmacist, and
