Four Catholic religious orders and several Catholic health ministries filed a federal lawsuit on July 17 challenging New York’s newly enacted assisted‑suicide law. The case, brought in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York, targets the state’s Medical Aid in Dying Act and is represented by a religious liberty advocacy group.
The plaintiffs include the Carmelite Sisters for the Aged and Infirm, the Dominican Sisters of Hawthorne, the Missionary Sisters of St. Benedict, the Little Sisters of the Poor, the Benedictine Sisters, Bishop John O. Barres, the Diocese of Rockville Centre, and a network of five Long Island hospitals.
The Medical Aid in Dying Act, signed into law on February 6, permits mentally competent adults with a terminal diagnosis and a life expectancy of six months or less to request and self‑administer life‑ending medication. The law requires a five‑day waiting period, video or audio documentation of the patient’s request, a mental‑health evaluation, and an in‑person physician assessment. It also provides an opt‑out for religiously affiliated home hospice providers.
Plaintiffs argue that the opt‑out provision is insufficient because it still obligates providers who decline to prescribe the medication to inform patients of the option, assist with eligibility requirements, and refer them to a willing practitioner. They contend that such duties expose providers to fines, license revocation, or criminal penalties, violating constitutional free‑exercise rights and federal conscience protections.
The lawsuit cites Catholic doctrine that regards human life as a divine gift, not a commodity to be disposed of. The Church’s teachings classify both suicide and assisted suicide as violations of the Fifth Commandment and deem the administration of lethal medication morally unacceptable, regardless of patient consent.
According to Catholic ethical guidelines, withholding or withdrawing extraordinary medical treatment may be permissible when it is futile or overly burdensome, but directly providing a lethal agent is never allowed. The guidelines also prohibit Catholic facilities from actively assisting patients in obtaining assisted suicide, including through referrals, while allowing patients to leave the facility or transfer records on their own.
The state law shields providers who refuse to act from civil, administrative, or criminal liability, but it does not exempt them from the requirement to refer patients to another provider. Plaintiffs argue that this referral mandate conflicts with the Church’s Ethical and Religious Directives, which forbid any active participation in the assisted‑suicide process.
The plaintiffs further contend that the law’s interaction with New York’s existing Palliative Care Information Act forces providers to discuss assisted dying as an end‑of‑life option, even when patients have not requested it. They claim that this broader disclosure requirement extends beyond the narrow religious exemption offered by the statute.
Representatives of the plaintiffs described the law as an unconstitutional conscription of religious caregivers into a program they deem a “culture of death.” They emphasized that their mission is to offer comfort, prayer, and medical care, not to facilitate death.
The governor affirmed that participation in the assisted‑suicide program is voluntary and that religious facilities retain the right to opt out. She characterized the legislation as a matter of bodily autonomy, asserting that New Yorkers deserve the choice to reduce suffering without shortening their lives.
The Attorney General’s office has not provided comment on the litigation. The plaintiffs indicate they will seek a preliminary injunction to halt enforcement of the law while the case proceeds. No court ruling has been issued at this time.
