A Washington DC court this afternoon denied the government’s motion requesting that last month’s injunction against federal funding of human embryonic stem cell research be lifted.
“Defendants are incorrect about much of their “parade of horribles” that will supposedly result from this Court’s preliminary injunction,” writes Judge Royce Lamberth (right), who handed down the injunction on 23 August, in today’s court order. (Download a PDF of judge’s order here.)
“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 government has said it will appeal if a stay is not granted.
Meanwhile, in documents filed on Friday, the plaintiffs said they plan to file for a so-called “summary motion” on 10 September, which they hope would prevent the case from being tried in a court room and would bring about a decision within two months.
Such a motion states that there are no material issues of fact — that is, disputes about the relevant legal points — remaining in the case, and therefore a trial would be unnecessary. If the judge grants the motion, the government would have 45 days to respond. The plaintiffs could make one more response within 10 day of that, after which the judge would issue his ruling.
“This is cutting-through-the-mustard time,” says Samuel Casey, executive vice president of Advocates International of Fairfax, Virginia, and one of the attorneys for James Sherley and Theresa Deisher, the plaintiffs in the case. “It’s our burden to come forward and say, ‘Look, we don’t think we have to go to trial. We think you, judge, can decide on the facts before you,’” Casey says.
A complete list of Great Beyond entries tracking this story can be found here.
For Nature’s analysis of the ruling and its impact see:
Stem-cell bill may need fixing
US stem-cell chaos felt abroad
The legalese behind the funding freeze