Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Acknowledgments
- Introduction
- PART ONE FIVE COMMON OBJECTIONS TO HUMAN REPRODUCTIVE CLONING REFLECT, REINFORCE, AND INSPIRE STEREOTYPES ABOUT HUMAN CLONES
- PART TWO ANTICLONING LAWS ARE BAD PUBLIC POLICY
- PART THREE ANTICLONING LAWS VIOLATE THE EQUAL PROTECTION GUARANTEE AND ARE UNCONSTITUTIONAL
- 10 Anticloning Laws Classify Human Clones and Are Subject to Strict Scrutiny
- 11 Anticloning Laws Inflict Judicially Cognizable Injuries that Confer Standing
- 12 Anticloning Laws Violate the Equal Protection Guarantee
- Conclusion
- Notes
- Index
11 - Anticloning Laws Inflict Judicially Cognizable Injuries that Confer Standing
from PART THREE - ANTICLONING LAWS VIOLATE THE EQUAL PROTECTION GUARANTEE AND ARE UNCONSTITUTIONAL
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 26 July 2009
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Acknowledgments
- Introduction
- PART ONE FIVE COMMON OBJECTIONS TO HUMAN REPRODUCTIVE CLONING REFLECT, REINFORCE, AND INSPIRE STEREOTYPES ABOUT HUMAN CLONES
- PART TWO ANTICLONING LAWS ARE BAD PUBLIC POLICY
- PART THREE ANTICLONING LAWS VIOLATE THE EQUAL PROTECTION GUARANTEE AND ARE UNCONSTITUTIONAL
- 10 Anticloning Laws Classify Human Clones and Are Subject to Strict Scrutiny
- 11 Anticloning Laws Inflict Judicially Cognizable Injuries that Confer Standing
- 12 Anticloning Laws Violate the Equal Protection Guarantee
- Conclusion
- Notes
- Index
Summary
The last chapter presented the argument that laws banning reproductive cloning treat human clones differently than humans born through sexual reproduction. This discrimination triggers the equal protection guarantee.
It is not enough to conclude that such anticloning laws have put the equal protection guarantee into play in some abstract sense. Someone has to bring a lawsuit challenging the laws under the equal protection guarantee. This chapter examines how that might come about.
Basic Principles of Federal Standing
Under Article III, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution, the federal courts have the jurisdiction to hear cases arising under the Constitution and the laws of the United States. Thus, if Congress enacts a federal anticloning law, the federal courts could hear an equal protection challenge to that law. Similarly, the federal courts could hear an equal protection challenge to the manner in which the FDA has applied federal law to stop cloning. Finally, if a plaintiff wants to challenge the constitutionality of a state anticloning law, he or she could bring that challenge in federal court subject to the limitations that the Eleventh Amendment imposes.
Thus, it seems likely that an equal protection challenge to anticloning laws could end up in federal court. However, to proceed, the plaintiff must have the standing to invoke the jurisdiction of the federal courts.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Illegal BeingsHuman Clones and the Law, pp. 176 - 189Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2005