Court Schedule Suggests Stem Cell Lawsuit Won't Be Resolved Until Late in Year

Given his previous writings on the case, it is widely expected that Lamberth will side with the plaintiffs and issue a permanent injunction to block hESC research. But in deference to the appeals court's stay of the preliminary injunction, Lamberth will stay his own permanent injunction—or if not, the appeals court will stay it, Greely predicts. Casey disagrees, but in any event he says that if the appeals court hasn't yet ruled by the time Lamberth does, it will probably consolidate the two cases and rule on the entire matter. A decision may not come out until at least the end the year, Casey says. If the government loses, hESC research would be shut down permanently.

Whatever the outcome, the loser is expected to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Outside groups are weighing in on the government's side. This week, the Coalition for the Advancement of Medical Research (CAMR), a broad collection of research and patient groups, submitted an amicus brief in the district court case. To demonstrate that the NIH guidelines don't induce researchers to derive hESCs (which destroys embryos), CAMR includes testimony from several NIH-funded hESC researchers who say they don't do any derivation work. Also, CAMR offers evidence that at least 62 of the 75 hESC lines approved by NIH were derived before President Barack Obama issued his executive order expanding hESC research in March 2009.

The Genetics Policy Institute in Wellington, Florida, a non-profit supporting hESC research, has also asked to file an amicus brief with its analysis of why the NIH policy doesn't violate the Dickey-Wicker law barring federal funds for research that harms embryos.