The Human Cloning Prohibition Act of 2001: vagueness and federalism.

Jurimetrics Pub Date : 2002-01-01
Jonathan S Swartz
{"title":"The Human Cloning Prohibition Act of 2001: vagueness and federalism.","authors":"Jonathan S Swartz","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>On July 31, 2001, the U.S. House of Representatives passed The Human Cloning Prohibition Act of 2001. The legislation proposes a complete ban on somatic cell nuclear transfer to create cloned human embryos; it threatens transgressors with criminal punishment and civil fines. House Bill 2505 is the first human cloning prohibition to pass either chamber of Congress. This note argues that the bill is unconstitutionally vague and inconsistent with the Supreme Court's recent Commerce Clause jurisprudence.</p>","PeriodicalId":81748,"journal":{"name":"Jurimetrics","volume":"43 1","pages":"79-90"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2002-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Jurimetrics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

On July 31, 2001, the U.S. House of Representatives passed The Human Cloning Prohibition Act of 2001. The legislation proposes a complete ban on somatic cell nuclear transfer to create cloned human embryos; it threatens transgressors with criminal punishment and civil fines. House Bill 2505 is the first human cloning prohibition to pass either chamber of Congress. This note argues that the bill is unconstitutionally vague and inconsistent with the Supreme Court's recent Commerce Clause jurisprudence.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
2001年禁止克隆人法案:模糊和联邦制。
2001年7月31日,美国众议院通过了《2001年禁止克隆人法案》。该法案提议全面禁止通过体细胞核移植来制造克隆人胚胎;它威胁要对违规者进行刑事处罚和民事罚款。众议院2505号法案是第一个禁止克隆人在国会两院都获得通过的法案。本说明认为,该法案含糊不清,违反宪法,与最高法院最近的商业条款判例不一致。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
GRANULAR PATIENT CONTROL OF PERSONAL HEALTH INFORMATION: FEDERAL AND STATE LAW CONSIDERATIONS. THE CRIMINAL PSYCHOPATH: HISTORY, NEUROSCIENCE, TREATMENT, AND ECONOMICS. Curing the unique health identifier: a reconciliation of new technology and privacy rights. Governing population genomics: law, bioethics, and biopolitics in three case studies. The coming pharmacogenomics revolution: tailoring drugs to fit patients' genetic profiles.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1