Judge weighing arguments to halt Illinois’ ‘medical aid in dying’ law
ahead of Sept. 12 start
[September 09, 2026]
By Hannah Meisel
CHICAGO — Illinois is set to become the first Midwestern state to allow
terminally ill adults to take life-ending medication prescribed by
physicians when the law goes into effect late this week.
But a federal judge is weighing whether to block the End-of-Life Options
for Terminally Ill Patients Act, or EOLA, from its Sept. 12 operative
date after hearing arguments Friday in a lawsuit that alleges EOLA
discriminates against people with disabilities. The suit also claims the
law runs afoul of federal law including the Americans With Disabilities
Act and the Affordable Care Act.
Thomas Geoghegan, who represents the disability rights groups, physician
and disabled Illinoisans who brought the case, told U.S. District Judge
John Tharp that the law upends the millennia-old tradition of the
Hippocratic oath, a pledge doctors make to “first do no harm.” As a
result, Geoghegan argued, EOLA will result in the “severe impairment” of
the relationship a patient with disabilities has with his or her
physician.
“It’s our view, ultimately, this is authorizing a different standard of
care,” he said.
Disability rights advocates fiercely opposed the two-year effort to pass
the law, warning that physician bias in perceived quality of life may
make doctors more inclined to encourage life-ending treatment over other
options for people with disabilities.
On Friday, Geoghegan contended this risk of coercion could be
exacerbated by the reality of the American healthcare system, in which
people with disabilities are often also poor or on public aid. Other
countries that allow medical aid in dying, like Canada and some of
Europe, have socialized medicine systems, he pointed out.
“It’s a whole different bag in the United States,” Geoghegan said.
“Because you can go out into the street right now and run into someone
who’s a defendant in a medical debt case. A whole lot of Americans are
uninsured or … underinsured.”
But the attorney defending EOLA on behalf of the state argued that the
law contains a key stopgap: Physicians are only allowed to discuss
lethal options with a terminally ill patient if the patient is the one
who brings it up.
EOLA only applies to adults with less than six months to live — a
prognosis that must be confirmed by two independent physicians. Patients
must make the request for lethal medication both verbally and in
writing, and doctors are required to inform them of alternate hospice
care and pain control options.
Additionally, a patient requesting the medication must pass a mental
evaluation by a physician to determine that they are mentally capable of
making the decision and not facing undue influence. Patients must also
be physically able to self-administer the medication.
But Geoghegan argued that the law doesn’t require enough state oversight
to the doctors determining whether a patient is a candidate for “medical
aid in dying,” a term proponents of the law often use. Opponents, which
also include religious groups like the Catholic Conference of Illinois,
prefer to describe it as “assisted suicide.” Because EOLA doesn’t
contain “an objective, state-engaged standard” for doctors to make those
determinations, Geoghegan told the judge the law amounted to a violation
of due process rights for people with disabilities.
[to top of second column]
|
The Dirksen Federal Courthouse is pictured in Chicago. (Capitol News
Illinois photo by Andrew Adams)
Tharp asked Elizabeth Morris, a high-ranking litigator in Attorney
General Kwame Raoul’s office, to respond to Geoghegan’s argument that
EOLA lacks a “process to assess the validity and legitimacy of actions
that might be taken under the statute.”
“I would argue the act itself sets forth this very thorough process to
slow things down and give doctors the opportunity to assess patients,”
Morris said, noting that doctors are trained to walk patients through
informed consent, which she also said is “explicitly spelled out” in the
law.
And because doctors are “responsible to the state” both to maintain
their medical licenses and under medical malpractice law, Morris argued
Illinois “has already put these guardrails in place.”
Tharp said he would make a decision on whether to grant the preliminary
injunction before the Sept. 12 effective date.
Another challenge is pending
In a separate challenge to EOLA filed last month by religiously
affiliated healthcare systems and doctors, another federal judge in
Chicago approved a temporary restraining order agreed to by all parties.
The stipulated TRO exempts the plaintiffs from having to discuss lethal
medication with patients until the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals decides
a case concerning similar themes.
In that case, stemming from a 2016 law requiring that, if requested by
the patient, providers who don’t perform abortions must refer, transfer
to or give patients written information about providers who do. A
federal judge in Rockford issued a mixed ruling in the case last year,
which the parties swiftly appealed. The appellate panel heard arguments
this spring and could issue a ruling any time now.
Democratic lawmakers pushed EOLA through to passage in October and Gov.
JB Pritzker signed it into law in December. The statute is also referred
to as “Deb’s Law,” named for former social worker Deb Robertson, a
Lombard resident living with an aggressive case of neuroendocrine
carcinoma.
In her arguments Friday, Morris noted the multi-year effort by advocates
to fill the “gap in end-of-life care” options in Illinois, asserting
that the “public interest in denying the motion for preliminary
injunction here is strong.”
Capitol News Illinois is
a nonprofit, nonpartisan news service that distributes state government
coverage to hundreds of news outlets statewide. It is funded primarily
by the Illinois Press Foundation and the Robert R. McCormick Foundation.
 |
