American’s Privacy Right to Die: Heightened Scrutiny Should Be Applied in Court

This paper examines the evolution and application of the right-to-die within the context of U.S. constitutional law, focusing on landmark cases such as Quinlan, Cruzan, and Schiavo. It explores the intersection of individual privacy, autonomy, and state interests, emphasizing the challenges courts face in adjudicating end-of-life decisions for incompetent patients. The analysis highlights the inconsistencies in judicial standards, the role of substituted judgment, and the socio-ethical implications of family disputes in such cases. The paper argues for heightened judicial scrutiny in right-to-die cases to ensure justice, prevent irreversible errors, and address the complexities of family dynamics, evidential burdens, and due process. Counterarguments are addressed, advocating for the balance between preserving human dignity and respecting family relationships. Ultimately, the paper underscores the need for clearer legal frameworks and procedural safeguards in navigating this sensitive and evolving area of law.