0
   

Please come here Dave. I think it is your time

 
 
Reply Sun 24 Jun, 2012 08:59 pm

In the context below, it gives me an impression that any federal judge in the United Stastes can issue an injunction to halt any US government funding. It makes me nervous: how can a judge have such a great power?

http://www.picupload.us/images/683_b.jpg
 
View best answer, chosen by oristarA
Joe Nation
  Selected Answer
 
  3  
Reply Mon 25 Jun, 2012 05:25 am
@oristarA,
In the US, anyone with standing (a person, State or Corporation affected by a law) may bring suit against the government challenging the legality of such law.
A judge may issue an injunction halting the activities or funding of the law until such time as evidence for and against the law are brought before the Court.

In most cases, persons in favor of the law can request a stay of the injunction until the matter is resolved, meaning the law continues to be in force until the judgement is either upheld (the funding would stop) or overturned ( the funding continues.)

In this case, the Court's ruling was overturned.

Quote:
WASHINGTON -- A divided federal appeals court has ruled that opponents of taxpayer-funded stem cell research are not likely to succeed in a lawsuit to stop it.

In a 2-1 decision Friday, the panel of the U.S. court of appeals in Washington overturned a judge's order that would have blocked taxpayer funding for stem cell research.

The panel reversed an opinion last August by U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth, who said the research likely violates the law against federal funding of embryo destruction.

The 1996 law prohibits the use of taxpayer dollars in work that harms an embryo, so private money has been used to cull batches of the cells. Those batches can reproduce in lab dishes indefinitely, and the Obama administration issued rules permitting taxpayer dollars to be used in work on them
.


But that process took from August 2010 until the end of April 2011.
~~
We are a free country, not as free as we think we are, but voices from all sides of all issues can get a hearing and, occasionally, there is 'justice for all'.

I am not an attorney. If I have stated anything above incorrectly, I would appreciate a trained mind to make the appropriate changes.

Joe(i read a lot)Nation

oristarA
 
  1  
Reply Mon 25 Jun, 2012 05:53 am
@Joe Nation,
Thank you Joe.

Does the law in "A Law in Time" refer to the law that supports the embryonic stem cell research?
Joe Nation
 
  1  
Reply Mon 25 Jun, 2012 09:42 am
@oristarA,
I believe it refers to a law which might have had to be written in order to have the funding continue IF the injunction decision were upheld. ("In time" to save the experimenter's work.)

As it happened, one party to the lawsuit found non-government funds to remove those embryos which might have been destroyed from the experiments and the Obama administration re-wrote or clarified the regulations so that the Science could go forward.

In the rest of the world, stem cell research is important, non-controversial science. <sigh>

It's usually the same people who are suspicious of science and technology who yell the loudest about how the USA is no longer the world's leading industrial nation.

Joe(I don't understand them.)Nation



0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

deal - Question by WBYeats
Let pupils abandon spelling rules, says academic - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Please, I need help. - Question by imsak
Is this sentence grammatically correct? - Question by Sydney-Strock
"come from" - Question by mcook
concentrated - Question by WBYeats
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Please come here Dave. I think it is your time
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.07 seconds on 09/29/2024 at 06:34:01