Updated Tuesday July 20, 2021
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
TRENTON, NEW
JERSEY, USA. Attorney Margaret Dore, President of Choice is an
Illusion, which has fought against assisted suicide and euthanasia
legalization throughout the United States, and internationally, has
released the following statement in connection with the filing of a
constitutional challenge amicus brief, which seeks to invalidate New
Jersey’s Medical Aid in Dying for the Terminally Ill Act. The case,
Petro et al v. Grewal, is pending in the Superior Court of New Jersey
Appellate Division, A-003837-19.
Tuesday, July 20, 2021
Friday, April 24, 2020
Dore Motion for Reconsideration in Glassman Case
To view Dore's brief as submitted, click here.
I. RELIEF REQUESTED
Margaret Dore moves for reconsideration of the Court’s order dated April 1, 2020, which upheld the constitutionality of the Medical Aid in Dying for the Terminally Ill Act.[1]
II. THE ACT MUST BE SET ASIDE
The Court did not reach the Act’s violation of the object in title rule, which is dispositive to set the Act aside. The Court should reach this issue now to overturn the Act.
The Court’s order states that Dore asked the Court to declare the Act unconstitutional “on grounds not asserted by plaintiffs.”[2] The plaintiffs, did, however, ask the Court to rule on the issue, stating:
This case, however, is about euthanasia. The Act is also not limited to dying people. Patient voluntariness is allowed, but not required. These are material facts not disclosed by the Act’s title and related findings. The Act is unconstitutional and must be set aside.
I. RELIEF REQUESTED
Margaret Dore moves for reconsideration of the Court’s order dated April 1, 2020, which upheld the constitutionality of the Medical Aid in Dying for the Terminally Ill Act.[1]
II. THE ACT MUST BE SET ASIDE
The Court did not reach the Act’s violation of the object in title rule, which is dispositive to set the Act aside. The Court should reach this issue now to overturn the Act.
The Court’s order states that Dore asked the Court to declare the Act unconstitutional “on grounds not asserted by plaintiffs.”[2] The plaintiffs, did, however, ask the Court to rule on the issue, stating:
Ms. Dore’s brief should be considered by the Court since if the law is unconstitutional under the single object rule, it should be the Court’s responsibility to raise that issue sua sponte even if not raised by Ms. Dore or the Plaintiffs.[3]The Legislature understood that it was enacting a strictly voluntary law limited to assisted suicide for dying patients.[4] The prior judge expressed a similar view. See, for example, the transcript from the hearing on August 14, 2019 (“This case is not about euthanasia”).[5]
This case, however, is about euthanasia. The Act is also not limited to dying people. Patient voluntariness is allowed, but not required. These are material facts not disclosed by the Act’s title and related findings. The Act is unconstitutional and must be set aside.
Friday, March 27, 2020
Margaret Dore: Euthanasia Act "Must Be Set Aside"
![]() |
E. David Smith |
The specific matter before the court was a motion to dismiss brought by the defendant, New Jersey Attorney General, Gurbir S. Grewal.
The plaintiff, Joseph Glassman, represented by E. David Smith, opposed the motion, as did Margaret Dore, president of Choice is an Illusion, representing herself as amicus curiae.
Dore, who had filed both an amicus brief and a reply brief, argued that the Act must be set aside pursuant to the New Jersey Constitution. Her arguments largely tracked her reply brief, a portion of which is set forth below.
Tuesday, January 7, 2020
Press Release: Aid in Dying Act Is Unconstitutional
![]() |
Margaret Dore, Esq. |
TRENTON, NJ, UNITED STATES, January 10, 2020 /EINPresswire.com/ -- Attorney Margaret Dore, president of Choice is an Illusion, a non-profit corporation opposed to assisted suicide and euthanasia, has filed a friend of the court brief in Glassman v. Grewal, which seeks to overturn New Jersey's Medical Aid in Dying for the Terminally Ill Act.
"Aid in Dying" is a euphemism for euthanasia. Dore's brief argues that the Act is stacked against the individual, not limited to people near death and unconstitutional due to the way it was enacted.
Friday, December 27, 2019
Corrected Dore Friend of the Court Brief: New Jersey "Aid in Dying Act" Is Unconstitutional
To view the filed print version, including the appendix, click here.
I. IDENTITY OF AMICUS
Margaret Dore is a licensed attorney in good standing in Washington State where assisted suicide is legal. She is appearing pro se.
Dore is a former Law Clerk to the Washington State Supreme Court and the Washington State Court of Appeals. She worked for a year with the United States Department of Justice and has been in private practice since 1990. She is also president of two nonprofit corporations opposed to assisted suicide and euthanasia: Choice is an Illusion, a 501(c)4 nonprofit corporation; and the Foundation for Choice is an Illusion, a 501(c)3 public charity.
Dore has personally appeared and testified against assisted suicide and/or euthanasia in at least 20 US legislatures, and also internationally. Her CV is attached in the appendix, at pages A-1 through A-4. For more information see www.margaretdore.org and www.choiceillusion.org.
II. STATEMENT OF RELIEF SOUGHT
Invalidation of the Medical Aid in Dying for the Terminally Ill Act (“the Act”).[1]
I. IDENTITY OF AMICUS

Dore is a former Law Clerk to the Washington State Supreme Court and the Washington State Court of Appeals. She worked for a year with the United States Department of Justice and has been in private practice since 1990. She is also president of two nonprofit corporations opposed to assisted suicide and euthanasia: Choice is an Illusion, a 501(c)4 nonprofit corporation; and the Foundation for Choice is an Illusion, a 501(c)3 public charity.
Dore has personally appeared and testified against assisted suicide and/or euthanasia in at least 20 US legislatures, and also internationally. Her CV is attached in the appendix, at pages A-1 through A-4. For more information see www.margaretdore.org and www.choiceillusion.org.
II. STATEMENT OF RELIEF SOUGHT
Invalidation of the Medical Aid in Dying for the Terminally Ill Act (“the Act”).[1]
Sunday, December 8, 2019
John Norton: A Cautionary Tale
In March 2012, I watched John Norton testify before the Joint Judiciary Committee of the Massachusetts Legislature. A person with ALS, he had been told at age 18 or 19 that he would die in three to five years from paralysis. Below find his story, at age 74, as submitted to a Canadian court via this affidavit:
Wednesday, April 3, 2019
To Governor Phil Murphy: Veto Flawed Euthanasia Act (Bill A. 1504 Second Reprint)
![]() |
Governor Murphy |
By Margaret Dore, Esq., MBA
To view pdf version, click here1. The Act
The Act legalizes “aid in dying,” a traditional euphemism for active euthanasia.[1] The Act is based on similar laws in Oregon and Washington State.
2. Pushback Against Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia
In the last ten years, nine states have strengthened their laws against assisted suicide and/or euthanasia: Alabama, Arizona, Georgia, Idaho, Louisiana, New Mexico, Ohio, South Dakota and Utah.[2]
Labels:
A1504,
Assisted Suicide,
euthanasia
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)