September 7, 2017: The Court of Appeals, the state’s highest court, dismissed a case that sought to have New York courts recognize the right to medical aid in dying. In the case Myers v. Schneiderman, the plaintiffs (terminally ill patients, medical providers, and End of Life Choices New York) asked the courts to rule on the basis of an interpretation of existing assisted-suicide statutes and/or equal protection and due process clauses of the New York Constitution. The decision upheld the dismissal of the case at an earlier stage, so the plaintiffs never had the opportunity to present their case before a court. The decision is at: https://www.nycourts.gov/ctapps/Decisions/2017/Sep17/77opn17-Decision.pdf
Opponents of aid in dying hailed the decision as a victory, while proponents reaffirmed their efforts to have the legislature enact the Medical Aid in Dying Act. See article in the Times Union.
The situation here contrasts with that in Montana, where the Montana Supreme Court ruled in favor of physician aid in dying on December 31, 2009. In the case Baxter v. Montana the plaintiffs (a patient, four doctors, and Compassion & Choices) claimed the right under sections of the state constitution regarding individual dignity and privacy. A district court agreed, protecting both the patient and the patient’s physician. On appeal by the state, the Supreme Court affirmed the decision, but not on constitutional grounds. Instead, the court based its ruling largely on an interpretation of the existing Rights of the Terminally Ill Act.
Since the ruling, proponents of aid in dying in Montana have sought to have the legislature establish rules and procedures for the practice, and opponents have sought to have the ruling overturned. No law has passed.
Also, in New Mexico on January 13, 2014 a Judicial Court ruled that medical aid in dying was a (state) constitutional right. Ultimately, on June 30, 2016, the New Mexico Supreme Court overruled that decision. Since then, attempts to pass an “End of Life Options Act” have failed.