Research involving stem cells lines derived from human embryos will resume after a federal appeals court stayed a judge’s decision to bar federal funding of the projects.
A three-member panel of the U.S Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued a temporary stay on a ruling by Judge Royce Lamberth of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. President Barack Obama had sought to restore stem cell research funding from constraints imposed under the Bush administration, but Lamberth ruled that the policy violated the Dickey-Wicker Amendment, aimed at stopping the destruction of human embryos.
The decision was made to give the appeals court time to consider a U.S. Justice Dept. emergency motion to stay the funding ban. Lamberth yesterday denied a similar Justice Dept. motion.
With the Rise of AI, What IP Disputes in Healthcare Are Likely to Emerge?
Munck Wilson Mandala Partner Greg Howison shared his perspective on some of the legal ramifications around AI, IP, connected devices and the data they generate, in response to emailed questions.
“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,” according to court documents.
Obama’s policy allowed the use of stem cell lines derived from frozen embryos from fertility treatments that were no longer needed and donated according to stringent ethical guidelines. The plaintiffs in the lawsuit, James Sherley and Theresa Deisher, argued that the Obama policy violated the Dickey-Wicker rules.
Lamberth agreed, ruling that the Dickey-Wicker rule clearly bans federal funding of research using ESC-derived lines because “the language of the statute reflects the unambiguous intent of Congress to enact a broad prohibition of funding research in which a human embryo is destroyed,” according to court documents.
In its motion to stay Lamberth’s decision pending an appeal, the Justice Dept. argued that the ban is an irreparable blow to research that “holds great promise for the development of treatments for a wide range of serious and life-threatening diseases and conditions,” according to court documents.
A Personalized Approach to Medication Nonadherence
At the Abarca Forward conference earlier this year, George Van Antwerp, managing director at Deloitte, discussed how social determinants of health and a personalized member experience can improve medication adherence and health outcomes.
“Research into the unique properties of stem cells may lead to major medical breakthroughs that would offer hope to people suffering from cancer, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, spinal cord injuries, neurodegenerative conditions, and many other disorders,” wrote Dr. Francis Collins, head of the National Institutes of Health, in an affidavit filed as part of the government’s motion to stay.
“Defendants are incorrect about much of their ‘parade of horribles’ that will supposedly result from this Court’s preliminary injunction,” Lamberth retorted in his brief maintaining the ban. “In this Court’s view, a stay would flout the will of Congress, as this Court understands what Congress has enacted in the Dickey-Wicker Amendment. Congress remains perfectly free to amend or revise the statute. This Court is not free to do so.”
The Massachusetts Medical Devices Journal is the online journal of the medical devices industry in the Commonwealth and New England, providing day-to-day coverage of the devices that save lives, the people behind them, and the burgeoning trends and developments within the industry.
