The Cryogenics Paper (100 points)

Background Information: John Smith is a 19-year-old student at Central Washington University. He has just been informed that he has a terminal form of Leukemia. There is absolutely no cure for his form of the disease. He will die within 6 months. In order to try and “save” his life, he has hired a cryogenics company to freeze his body one month before his death. He will leave instructions to be “unfrozen” when a cure for his disease is discovered.

However, before such an order is carried out, the State of Washington’s Attorney General seeks and is granted a stay in district court. The Attorney General feels that to freeze a living human being violates the murder statutes of the state. John Smith appeals to the United States Supreme Court, and the Court agrees to hear the case.

At the oral arguments, the Attorney General argues that freezing a living human being is murder, regardless of the motivations. He is factually correct, in that, after the cryogenics process, Mr. Smith will be dead in all legal and medical senses of the term. Therefore, the Attorney General argues that the state has a “compelling state interest” to protect not only Mr. Smith, but also the safety of all Washington citizens. The AG suggests that if we allow Mr. Smith to freeze himself, it will just be the first steps down a slippery path to state sanctioned euthanasia.

Mr. Smith counters that he has a fundamental right to privacy. It is his body, his life, and he has the right to do with it, what he pleases as long as it does not harm anyone else.

Unfortunately, the Court is deadlocked at 4 to 4. You are the deciding Justice on the court.

The Assignment: You need to draft a 5-7 page judicial opinion. In the opinion you must:

1) Set up a judicial balancing test and make a decision with respect to Mr. Smith.

2) Ground your decision in Constitutional doctrine, NOT YOUR PERSONAL OPINION. This means you must find some clauses in the Constitution on which to base your opinion.

3) You must find previous case law that supports your decision. (Use the Links section of my web site.)

4) You must NOT write a judicial “blank check.” This means your decision must be narrow. For example, a blanket right to privacy means you could kill someone as long as you did it in your own house. A blanket right for the state to protect you from harm could result in a totalitarian regime. Avoid both extremes.

5) Make it clear to the reader which philosophy of judicial interpretation you are using—restraint, activism, strict, loose or original intent.

6) Do not spend more than one page reciting the facts of the case….get into the judicial analysis/decision making.

Good luck!

For a little help with research, view the following web site:

http://www.publicagenda.org/issues/overview.cfm?issue_type=right2die

http://www.princeton.edu/~lawjourn/Fall97/II1moyers.html

http://www.wiu.edu/library/govpubs/guides/euthanas.htm

Paper Scoring Rubric:

Your paper will be scored based on the following criteria.

Possible Points

1. Spelling, grammar and punctuation 20 pts

2. Court case citations (2 minimum) 20 pts

3. Logical organization of paper:

Intro, clear argument, balancing test supporting cases

and Constitutional references, identification of

judicial philosophy and a conclusion 30 pts

4. Depth/intelligence of argument 30 pts

Total Score /100

Lost Points:

No name

Not stapled

Paper arrives in silly, wasteful plastic binder

Late--5 points per day