Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Scientists Attack Court Ruling Against Barack Obama's Stem Cell Policy
Order blocking government funding of stem cell research is a serious setback in search for cures to diseases, say scientists
American scientists have reacted with anger at a court ruling that strikes down Barack Obama's decision to greatly expand medical research using stem cells taken from human embryos.
Barack Obama's opponents say he overstepped a law barring the US government funding research in which human embryos are destroyed. (Photograph: Mauricio Lima/AFP/Getty Images) Scientists described the order by a federal judge in Washington, who said that the president had overstepped a law barring the government funding of research in which human embryos are destroyed, as "deplorable" and "a serious setback" in the search for cures to major diseases.
Lawyers for an alliance of Christian groups who brought the case, which tied opposition to experiments on embryonic stem cells to the anti-abortion campaign, said the ruling appeared to go further than restrictions under President George Bush and bar all government funding for such research. It also pushes the ever-contentious issue of abortion to the fore again in the runup to November's mid-term elections and presents Obama with the difficult choice of whether he wants a battle in the courts and in Congress to repeal the legislation.
The court order came after an executive order by Obama in March last year that lifted restrictions put in place by Bush eight years earlier. Those restrictions limited government funding to a small number of existing lines of human embryonic stem cells. The administration had allocated about $250m (£160m) to the research. The National Institutes of Health added an additional 70 lines after Obama's order. But Judge Royce Lamberth ruled that the president's decision was in conflict with the Dickey-Wicker amendment, a 1996 law that bars the use of government funds for "research in which a human embryo or embryos are destroyed". The law has been renewed by Congress each year.
Scientists swiftly condemned the ruling. The California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (Cirm) said the court order would disrupt advances in research for cures to diseases such as diabetes and Lou Gehrig's. "The decision is a deplorable brake on all stem cell research," said Cirm's president, Alan Trounson. "Many discoveries with other cell types ... would not happen without ongoing research in human embryonic stem cells."
Steven Aden, a lawyer for the Alliance Defence Fund which brought the case, said: "We're gratified that the court accepted what we think is a plain and commonsense reading of the applicable law and we're hopeful that ultimately this will result in the renewal of good, science-based funding for adult stem cell research."
Scientists were also left confused over whether they had to immediately halt embryonic stem cell work paid for with government funds or if the ruling only prevented federal authorities from distributing more grants.
Cirm said the order appeared to bar research permitted even under the tighter regulations imposed by Bush.
Aden said he believed the ruling prohibits any government-funded research involving embryonic stem cells.
"We think that's right. When congress passed the Dickey-Wicker amendment back in the days of the Clinton administration the reason for that was to get the American public out of funding research that involves the destruction of human life," he said.
An opinion poll by the Pew foundation last year found that 54% of Americans support research using human embryos.
23 Comments so far
Show AllThere are two issues, the policy issue whether human embryonic stem cells ("ESCs") should be available for research in accordance with the Obama Administration guidelines, and the legal issue whether the issuance of those guidelines was in accordance with the applicable statute, i.e., the so-called Dickey-Wicker Amendment, which the Congress enacted in 1996. Judge Lambeth's decision was focused on the legal issue, not the policy issue. He concluded, basically, that the Obama Administration had misconstrued the Dickey-Wicker Amendment to allow U.S. Government funding of research that in situations where a human embryo was destroyed, through extraction of the ESCs, as long as the research being funded related only to investigations of the ESCs after extraction and not to the extraction per se. He found that reading unreasonable and thus granted the injunction. That presents, in addition to the possibility of an appeal to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, legislative action to clarify or repeal the Dickey-Wicker Amendment. To argue that Judge Lambeth should have judged the case on the policy issue rather than the legal issue is incorrect; his job is to apply the law, not to overrule the Congress.
Meaning, you're opposed to using human embryos for medical research.
The hypocrisy on this one is almost unbearable.
Check out just the name, "Dickey-Wicker" and with a little tweaking, what comes to mind?
And gotta love this one, "the reason for that was to get the American public out of funding research that involves the destruction of human life."
Dang! Can some creative, progresive lawyer work that judgment call into a ban on all weapons henceforth?! Imagine the untold sums that could become liberated from the department of defense's weapons' programs... and used for things that matter, like preparing for destabilizing weather conditions. With the grain lost in Russia and harvests of Pakistan recently washed away, our own Gulf waters polluted by oil... many signs point to upcoming food shortages; but by all means, send that money to the MIC! Now that sounds like a plan of defense! Not!
Guess the stem cell research funds will now be used to refine drone technology that involves MASS destruction of human life.
HYPOCRISY personified
"But Judge Royce Lamberth ruled that the president's decision was in conflict with the Dickey-Wicker amendment"
As the employers of our public servants, we the people understand that our employees' performance has been increasingly arbitrary in recent years, with judges ruling according to the "letter of the law" in some instances, and in blatant support of the elite status quo in most others, particularly when it came to the many grotesque violations of the laws of the land by top federal officials. They are not decent employees, let alone decent "authorities". They enjoy little to no respect or genuine support among the people, but rely on the numbing effect of material/petro-opiates to subdue the oppressed. That is, amazingly enough, those with the power to fire them: their employers.
Stem cells that SHOULD have been destroyed now sit on the Supreme Court--and many others mock Christianity, which any two functioning brain cells realize was meant to "help thy neighbor," as opposed to making one's neighbor suffer.
Thanks, Horace, for this excellent post. Among all the many hysterical reactions to this decision, your post is the only piece I have seen that clearly and accurately describes the decision and its significance.
"the reason for that was to get the American public out of funding research that involves the destruction of human life"
Does that mean that we've ended the experimentation in land mines and drones for the war in Afghanistan or perhaps ended the medical and psychological research on "enhanced interrogation?"
Wow, is it possible that we're aiming for the high road of ethics and morality; nah. Lord have mercy on us all.
The Dickey-Wicker forever rules over all,
and to the Dark Ages will keep us in thrall.
We're not supposed to cure diseases
if the Dickey-Wicker God it displeases.
Got Lou Gehrig's, Hodgkins, diabetes or cancer?
Dickey-Wicker says stem-cell research isn't an answer.
Worship those embryos, don't let 'em be destroyed,
the Great God Dickey-Wicker says they can't be employed
to save lives the Dickey-Wicker alone brings to being,
with his wicked little dick in medieval wet dreaming.
Like your post... :)
....But what will we do for the next war, you know, the one planned for 2027 ??? Who are we going to DRAFT?...Who's going to do our killing-rampages-genocides?
They have done nothing for the living, human, animal, environment or air!
This ruling is beyond hypocrisy, it is out right BS. If the alliance of Christian groups feels that the use of embryos is wrong for medical research, then the discarding of them as medical waste should be equally as wrong. You can’t have it both ways. Therefore these alliances of Christian groups should be made to pay for funerals and internments and the cemetery fees for these embryos. See how fast they change holy than stance when it cost them. The same applies with abortions. If a woman makes an informed decision to terminate a pregnancy through a legal medical procedure and she is blocked by these alliances of Christian groups by any means, than the holy than must be made to pay for the children that are brought into this world till age 18. They make such a big deal about the physiological trauma cause by abortion to the woman, what about the physiological trauma cause to the mother and child by adoption? Also, with all the US troupes being exposed to the DU in both Iraq and Afghanistan and the enviable deformed children wouldn’t it be kinder to abort than bring a two headed or grossly deformed child into this world? Are these alliances of Christian groups going to care for and pay for the support they will require?
The anti-everything attitude of "Christians" associated with the "Party of No" is _really_ starting to piss me off.
They care _NOTHING_ about HUMAN life. All they care about is non-viable organisms that have the potential to become a human life. The Embryos used in research ARE TO BE THROWN IN THE TRASH if they aren't used for research.
Damned IDIOTS!
They're even beginning to oppose birth control ... meaning they care more about sperm and eggs ... and the joining of the two ... than they do about LIVING HUMAN BEINGS!
I guess they don't have enough to do with their lives that they have to worry about where my sperm ends up.
George Carlin on "Pro Life, Abortion, And The Sanctity Of Life":
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AvF1Q3UidWM
Exactly! They are already dead.. it's just like as if there is a corpse in need of an autopsy so they can find out the reason why that person died and possibly figuring out many other things to prevent future deaths.
"The California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (Cirm) said the court order would disrupt advances in research for cures to diseases such as diabetes and Lou Gehrig's."
The Institute should go to court in California to overturn the 1996 Dickey-Wicker law, which apparently blocks research that _could_ save the lives of millions of LIVING people. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals would uphold any ruling that overturns that law, then the Supreme Court would have to rule. IMHO, they're already on thin ice with the ruling allowing corporate funding for elections. Impeachment of Justices for multiple rulings against the majority opinion would be very popular.
The competency of the justice system to do the right thing can be illustrated by the case of Troy Davis.
We don't take a vote to determine what is right and wrong. We don't vote on whether this or that person should be treated fairly. We don't vote on matters of personal choice. At least we didn't before the Tea Baggers took control of the GOP and drug us all into this through-the-looking-glass universe.
This is OK for a recreational drug trip but when people insist on staying on the other side they are called psychotic---unless of course they are too important to be labeled. When all those in power insist on using their hallucinations as guiding principles we are fucked.
I can't say how happy I am by this Federal Judges ruling. Stem cell research, in addition, and most emphatically, can be taken from umbilical cords, and human tissue and cell (new drugs to treat Parkinsan's disease, etc.), not f/ human embryos. It is a monstrous practice to use human embryos to advance human like, particularly in people in their 60's, 70', 80's and 90's, although, I believe in natropathetic methods, vitamins, herbs, organic foods, etc. I see myself making it to 125 year old-- definitely.
In addition, to human embryos, there should be a limit on abortion past 9 weeks. In addition, on income, need, age (young people), etc., Moms' (or potential) should be given financial assistance to have their baby and not opt for an abortion
Jason Pacifico, I can see your concern for life. And, as someone who advocates a vegan (or vegetarian) diet, I also believe that some of the diseases they are trying to find cues for may be preventable by eating healthy, organic food in the first place (assuming such food is readily available and is affordable.)
The trouble with the so-called "pro-life" position is not with the sentiment itself, but with the people who express them - in particular, their extreme hypocrisy. I do not know you, so you can be sure that I am making a general statement. The "pro-life" argument would carry more credibility if the same people are also out on the streets demanding an end to unjust wars (you really have to work hard to show a "just" war), an end to death penalty and end to poverty anywhere in the world. Or, at least, in their own country. They should be the first to share their wealth - beyond their immediate and critical necessities - so that a starving person can eat. Or at least be pressuring their government to let no human being starve or suffer in the cold. At least in their own country.
Whether you are atheist, devout believer or someone who doesn't care, there is a lesson in the world of nature that can be easily observed. Whether it happened by evolution, by creation or just happened in some unknown way, it is clear that all successful life on the earth produces more (let's call them) "reprons" than needed. The dandilion produces so many seeds in my neighbor's weed patch that it easily infects all gardens for a mile wide. The salmon lays far more eggs than can successfully make it through a life. If all the eggs from houseflies made it to adulthood they would crowd all other life off the planet in one summer.
Everything reproductive is created in excess! When a man ejaculates, millions of sperm cells go to waste never to meet an egg. Every woman produces far more eggs in her life than can be fertilized. Of all those that are fertilized some are lost because they fail to implant in the uterus. The rule of nature or of God or of Zarquan (at your pleasure) is that few make it and the others go to waste. The embryonic cells under consideration here are part of the waste. Let's use them productively.
If and when this idiot judge (apointed by Reagan -no surprise) comes down with alzheimers or diabetes or any of the other loathsome deseases that stem cell research has the potential for delaying or curing, then he might regret this truly stupid ruling.to save some blobs of protoplasm that were to be dumped anyway in favor of adult and living humans.