CA appeals court upholds stem cell research program

Legal News Center

A California state appeals court ruled Monday that the state's stem cell research program "suffers from no constitutional or other legal infirmity," leading the way for approximately $3 billion in grant money to be awarded to researchers. The Court of Appeal of the State of California First District upheld last year's lower court decision upholding the constitutionality of the program, operated by the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM). The lower court determined that the stem cell program was being administered with sufficient state control and did not violate ballot initiative or conflicts of interest rules.

The research program, known as Proposition 71, was approved in a 2004 state referendum by a 59 percent margin. In its ruling, the appeals court noted the delay in research that the litigation had caused:

The objective of the proposition is to find, "as speedily as possible," therapies for the treatment and cure of major diseases and injuries, an aim the legitimacy of which no one disputes. The very pendency of this litigation, however, has interfered with implementation for more than two years.
The lawsuit against the program was brought by the California Family Bioethics Council and two anti-tax organizations - the People's Advocate and the National Tax Limitation Foundation. A lawyer for the plaintiffs said they would consider an appeal after reviewing the court's opinion, admitting that the California Supreme Court refuses to hear many appeals.

Related listings

  • DOJ Releases New Americans with Disabilities Act

    DOJ Releases New Americans with Disabilities Act

    Legal News Center 02/27/2007

    The Department of Justice today released new technical assistance materials to help state and local governments comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The materials are part of the “ADA Best Practices Tool Kit for State and Local Gove...

  • Supreme Court hears arguments in deadly force

    Supreme Court hears arguments in deadly force

    Legal News Center 02/26/2007

    [##_1L|1406902931.jpg|width="120" height="107" alt=""|_##]The US Supreme Court heard oral arguments Monday in Scott v. Harris, 05-1631, where the court must decide whether a police officer violated a fleeing suspect's constitutional rights by using d...

  • N.Y. home court in arena suit - judge

    N.Y. home court in arena suit - judge

    Legal News Center 02/24/2007

    [##_1L|1111769117.jpg|width="100" height="114" alt=""|_##]A lawsuit against the controversial Atlantic Yards basketball arena should be bounced out of federal court, a judge ruled yesterday. The suit challenging the use of eminent domain to make way ...

Is Now the Time to Really Call a Special Education Lawyer?

IDEA, FAPE, CHILD FIND and IEPs: The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) guarantees all children with disabilities to a free appropriate public education (FAPE). FAPE starts with a school’s responsibility to identify that a child has a disability (Child Find) and create an Individualized Education Program (IEP) to suit the needs of the child.

Forte Law Group is one of only a very few law firms within the state of Connecticut that is dedicated to exclusively representing families and children with special needs.

Parents need to be persistent, dedicated and above all else aware of the many services and accommodations that their child is entitled to under the law. As early as this point within your child’s special education, many parents will often find themselves in the situation asking, “is now the time to really call a special education lawyer?” Here are a few things to consider when asking yourself that question.

Business News

St Peters, MO Professional License Attorney Attorney John Lynch has been the go-to choice for many professionals facing administrative sanction. >> read