• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe

MassDevice

The Medical Device Business Journal — Medical Device News & Articles | MassDevice

  • Latest News
  • Technologies
    • Artificial Intelligence (AI)
    • Cardiovascular
    • Orthopedics
    • Neurological
    • Diabetes
    • Surgical Robotics
  • Business & Finance
    • Wall Street Beat
    • Earnings Reports
    • Funding Roundup
    • Mergers & Acquisitions
    • Initial Public Offering (IPO)
    • Legal News
    • Personnel Moves
    • Medtech 100 Stock Index
  • Regulatory & Compliance
    • Food & Drug Administration (FDA)
    • Recalls
    • 510(k)
    • Pre-Market Approval (PMA)
    • MDSAP
    • Clinical Trials
  • Special Content
    • Special Reports
    • In-Depth Coverage
    • DeviceTalks
  • Podcasts
    • MassDevice Fast Five
    • DeviceTalks Weekly
    • OEM Talks
      • AbbottTalks
      • Boston ScientificTalks
      • DeviceTalks AI
      • IntuitiveTalks
      • MedtechWOMEN Talks
      • MedtronicTalks
      • Neuro Innovation Talks
      • Ortho Innovation Talks
      • Structural Heart Talks
      • StrykerTalks
  • Resources
    • About MassDevice
    • DeviceTalks
    • Newsletter Signup
    • Leadership in Medtech
    • Manufacturers & Suppliers Search
    • MedTech100 Index
    • Videos
    • Webinars
    • Whitepapers
    • Voices
Home » Appeals court lifts stem cells injunction

Appeals court lifts stem cells injunction

September 29, 2010 By MassDevice staff

stem cells

The three-judge panel on a federal appeals court considering whether to overturn a ban on federal funding of embryonic stem cell research lifted an injunction barring the funding, despite an apparent split among the judges revealed during a Sept. 27 hearing.

President Barack Obama’s administration is appealing a lower court decision banning federal funding of the research. During the hearing at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, two of the judges questioned the U.S. Justice Dept.’s arguments that the ban would do irreparable harm to the public interest, while a third seemed more sympathetic.

Judge Royce Lamberth of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia had ruled that federal funds could not be used for the the research, derailing scores of projects looking into the causes of diseases like Parkinson’s, Alzheimer’s and cystic fibrosis. 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.

But Dickey-Wicker proved to be a sticky wicket for both plaintiffs and defendants when the appeals court issued a temporary stay of the Lamberth ruling.

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.

Beth Brinkmann, a Justice Dept. lawyer, argued that the ban would be a waste of the $64 million that’s already been spent on 24 research projects at the National Institutes of Health, according to news reports. Thomas Hungar, an attorney for the plaintiffs, called that argument speculation and maintained that to nobody injured and nothing irreversible.

Judge Thomas Griffith, a George W. Bush appointee, appeared to be the most skeptical of the government’s argument, saying that the judges are not hearing the case to decide the wisdom of government policy but to judge whether the research violates the Dickey-Wicker amendment.

“All $64 million is completely ruined?” Griffith asked. “They don’t keep lab notebooks?”

There are notes, Brinkmann said, but “it would be a setback for the field. Biological material would be destroyed.”

Judge Brett Kavanaugh, another George W. Bush appointee, called the government’s position “odd” and “internally inconsistent” but said it might be best to defer to the government’s arguments because of the ambiguity of the Dickey-Wicker statute.

Clinton appointee Judge Judith Rogers said that even a temporary halt to the funding could damage public interest represented by the research.

But after considering the matter, the panel decided to stay Lamberth’s injunction and put the appeal on the fast track.

“Appellants have satisfied the standards required for a stay pending appeal,” according to court documents. “It is further ordered, on the court’s own motion, that consideration of this appeal be expedited.”

Filed Under: Legal News, News Well, Stem Cells

More recent news

  • BD files patent infringement lawsuit against Baxter over infusion pump tech
  • Tandem Diabetes Care subsidiary earns new FDA clearance for insulin infusion set
  • Apreo Health emerges from stealth with positive data for lung scaffold
  • Tivic adds new vagus nerve stim patent
  • Study backs Teleflex stapler for reducing post-op GERD rates

Primary Sidebar

“md
EXPAND YOUR KNOWLEDGE AND STAY CONNECTED
Get the latest med device regulatory, business and technology news.

DeviceTalks Weekly

See More >

MEDTECH 100 Stock INDEX

Medtech 100 logo
Market Summary > Current Price
The MedTech 100 is a financial index calculated using the BIG100 companies covered in Medical Design and Outsourcing.
MDO ad

Footer

MASSDEVICE MEDICAL NETWORK

DeviceTalks
Drug Delivery Business News
Medical Design & Outsourcing
Medical Tubing + Extrusion
Drug Discovery & Development
Pharmaceutical Processing World
MedTech 100 Index
R&D World
Medical Design Sourcing

DeviceTalks Webinars, Podcasts, & Discussions

Attend our Monthly Webinars
Listen to our Weekly Podcasts
Join our DeviceTalks Tuesdays Discussion

MASSDEVICE

Subscribe to MassDevice E-Newsletter
Advertise with us
About
Contact us

Copyright © 2025 · WTWH Media LLC and its licensors. All rights reserved.
The material on this site may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, cached or otherwise used, except with the prior written permission of WTWH Media.

Privacy Policy