WASHINGTON — In a victory for the President Barack Obama administration, a US federal judge on Wednesday dismissed a lawsuit that had temporarily blocked federal funding for embryonic stem cell research.
Judge Royce Lamberth’s summary judgment followed an appeals court decision in April that also ruled against the plaintiffs, two scientists who argued it was illegal to use taxpayer cash for research that destroys human embryos.
“President Obama is committed to supporting responsible stem cell research and today’s ruling was another step in the right direction,” said his deputy senior advisor Stephanie Cutter, calling the ruling “good news” for people with Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s or heart disease.
“While we don?t know exactly what stem cell research will yield, scientists believe this research could treat or cure diseases that affect millions of Americans every year,” said Cutter.
Obama lifted a ban on federal funding for the research in March 2009. His predecessor George W. Bush had blocked government funding for human embryonic stem cell research on new cell lines, citing religious grounds.
At issue in the latest court fight was a 1996 amendment to a US law called the Dickey-Wicker Amendment, which barred using taxpayer funds in research that destroys human embryos.
In August 2010, Lamberth, a US district court judge, took up a court challenge brought by a pair of scientists who opposed the research and issued an order to ban federal funding until the legal battle could be resolved.
A series of court decisions followed that temporarily lifted his ban. Wednesday’s decision by Lamberth dismisses the case.
“Having carefully considered the motions, oppositions, replies, supplemental briefing, the entire record in this case, and the applicable law, the Court will grant defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment and deny plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment,” Lamberth wrote in his ruling.
The decision was immediately hailed by the National Institutes of Health, which allocated about $40 million to human embryonic stem cell research in 2010 and has set aside $125 million this year — a tiny fraction of its $31 billion budget.
“We are pleased with today’s ruling. Responsible stem cell research has the potential to develop new treatments and ultimately save lives,” said a statement by NIH director Francis Collins.
“This ruling will help ensure this groundbreaking research can continue to move forward.”
The American Association for the Advancement of Science, an international non-profit group which publishes the prestigious journal Science, also applauded the move.
“The scientific consensus is that embryonic stem cell research is an extremely promising approach to developing more effective diagnostics and treatments for devastating conditions such as diabetes, spinal cord injuries and Parkinson’s disease,” said chief executive Alan Leshner.
“Judge Lamberth’s injunction last year threatened to cause real harm to researchers in this field and discourage the next generation of stem cell scientists.”
The defense team for the scientists who brought the lawsuit said in a statement they are “considering all options for appeal.”
Legal expert Abbe Gluck, an associate professor of law at Columbia University, told AFP the ruling was no surprise, given that the federal appellate court had already ruled the plaintiffs were unlikely to succeed.
“In April, the federal Court of Appeals vacated the ‘freeze’ on stem-cell research that the district court had previously granted, on the ground that the plaintiffs were unlikely to succeed on the merits of the ultimate case,” she said.
“The core of that appellate holding was that the court should defer to the expert agency’s — here NIH’s — interpretation of the statute, and the district court essentially held today that it was bound by the higher court’s ruling.”
The first two US trials of human embryonic stem cells to treat paralysis and blindness were launched late last year, both by private companies that did not rely on federal funds.
AFP journalists cover wars, conflicts, politics, science, health, the environment, technology, fashion, entertainment, the offbeat, sports and a whole lot more in text, photographs, video, graphics and online.
Raw Story is a progressive news site that focuses on stories often ignored in the mainstream media. While giving coverage to the big stories of the day, we also bring our readers' attention to policy, politics, legal and human rights stories that get ignored in an infotainment culture driven solely by pageviews.
Founded in 2004, Raw Story reaches 5 million unique readers per month and serves more than 19 million pageviews.