Scientists Seek Permanent Injunction Against Obama’s Embryonic Funding
by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor
September 10, 2010
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) — Responding to yesterday’s decision by a federal appeals court to overturn the temporary injunction a federal judge put in place against the taxpayer funding of embryonic stem cell research President Barack Obama put in place, two scientists are asking the judge to issue a permanent injunction.
U.S. district court Judge Royce Lamberth granted a preliminary injunction against the funding and Obama officials appealed his decision and asked to put the injunction on hold so taxpayer dollars can continue to flow to embryonic stem cell research projects while the lawsuit against the order moves ahead.
Yesterday, the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington put on hold that injunction while Judge Lamberth reviews the lawsuit itself.
“The purpose of this administrative stay is to give the court sufficient opportunity to consider the merits of the emergency motion for stay and should not be construed in any way as a ruling on the merits of that motion,” the appeals court wrote in its decision.
Advocates International, part of the legal team that brought the lawsuit, announced late Thursday that it has filed a comprehensive summary judgment motion in the federal district court, including evidentiary declarations by plaintiff scientists Dr. James Sherley and Theresa Deisher.
The motion asks Judge Lamberth to enter a final declaratory judgment declaring invalid the Obama administration’s controversial guidelines for public funding of embryonic stem cell research.
Samuel Casey, the lead attorney for the pro-life legal group, told LifeNews.com, "the summary judgment motion we have filed today demonstrates that plaintiffs are entitled to entry of summary judgment in their favor on their request for declaratory and injunctive relief against the National Institutes of Health Guidelines for Human Stem Cell Research."
He said Obama’s embryonic stem cell research "violates the Dickey-Wicker Amendment" and was implemented without "without observance of procedures required by law."
"We have asked the federal district court to permanently enjoin the government from implementing, applying, or taking any action whatsoever pursuant to the NIH Guidelines or otherwise funding research involving human embryonic stem cells," he said.
Casey said the motion goes further and asks Judge Lamberth to make it clear to NIH that not only can it not provide further grants for additional embryonic stem cell research with taxpayer dollars, but that scientists who already received, but have not spent, tax dollars should not spend the remainder of the funds until the case is concluded.
"We have also asked the Court to order the government to immediately inform any NIH grant recipients in possession or control of federal funds granted under the Guidelines for human embryonic stem cell research that any remaining and unspent NIH-granted funds may not be spent on human embryonic stem cell research but must be returned to NIH to fund lawful research," he said.
The parties involved in bringing the lawsuit can file a response to the appeals court’s decision to lift the injunction by September 14 and then the Obama administration can file its response to the plaintiffs by September 20.
Dr. James L. Sherley, a former member of the MIT faculty now currently working as a senior scientist at the Boston Biomedical Research Institute and Dr. Theresa Deisher, the founder of AVM Biotechnology were the two scientists behind the lawsuit.
Responding to their lawsuit, Judge Lamberth, in his 15-page decision, said "(Embryonic stem cell) research is clearly research in which an embryo is destroyed."
He noted, "Embryonic stem cell (ESC) research necessarily depends upon the destruction of a human embryo," and concluded that funding such research violates existing law.
He said his order would not hurt embryonic stem cell researchers because they have the opportunity to find private funds.
"There is no after-the-fact remedy for this injury because the Court cannot compensate plaintiffs for their lost opportunity to receive funds," Lamberth wrote.
Although NIH disputes this, Judge Lamberth said the temporary injunction would not hurt embryonic stem cell researchers because they have the opportunity to find private funds. Instead, he said the two adult stem cell research scientists are hurt by the movement of the funding to those engage in embryonic research.
"There is no after-the-fact remedy for this injury because the Court cannot compensate plaintiffs for their lost opportunity to receive funds," Lamberth wrote.
Embryonic stem cell research has yet to help a single patient, unlike adult stem cell research — which has helped patients with more than 100 diseases and medical conditions and which President Bush supported with hundreds of millions in federal funding.
The use of embryonic stem cells has not worked in animals because the cells, once injected, cause tumors and are rejected by the immune system. As a result, embryonic stem cells can’t be safely used in human trials until those problems are corrected.
A recent Rasmussen Reports poll finds 57 percent of Americans oppose the use of taxpayer funds to pay for embryonic stem cell research.
Sign Up for Free Pro-Life News From LifeNews.com
Daily Pro-Life News Report Twice-Weekly Pro-Life
News Report Receive a free daily email report from LifeNews.com with the latest pro-life news stories on abortion, euthanasia and stem cell research. Sign up here. Receive a free twice-weekly email report with the latest pro-life news headlines on abortion, euthanasia and stem cell research. Sign up here.
