California Appellate Court panel upholds constitutionality of State proposition promoting embryonic stem cell research

A three-judge panel of the California First District Court of Appeal in San Francisco on Monday ruled unanimously that California's Proposition 71 -- approved by voters in 2004 to provide $3 billion for human embryonic stem cell research -- is constitutional, the New York Times reports (Pollack, New York Times, 2/27).

State voters in November 2004 approved Proposition 71 to provide $295 million annually for 10 years for human embryonic stem cell research, and two taxpayer groups and the California Family Bioethics Council in 2005 filed a lawsuit arguing that the measure violates the state constitution. California Superior Court Judge Bonnie Sabraw in April 2006 ruled that the plaintiffs failed to show the proposition "is clearly, positively and unmistakably unconstitutional," adding that the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine and the Independent Citizens' Oversight Committee -- which are charged with implementing Proposition 71 -- "are operating in the same fashion as other state agencies." The plaintiffs appealed the ruling. Until the suits are resolved, CIRM is unable to sell state bonds required to fund the program, institute officials have said. The California Stem Cell Research and Cures Finance Committee in November 2006 unanimously approved a $181 million loan to CIRM, which includes $150 million from the state's general fund ordered by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R) and $31 million from private donations (Kaiser Daily Women's Health Policy Report, 2/16).

Ruling, Reaction
The three-judge panel on Monday upheld Sabraw's decision that found that the program did not violate the structure of ballot initiatives, rules regarding conflicts of interest or laws concerning state spending, the Times reports. The panel's 58-page ruling said Proposition 71 "suffers from no constitutional or other legal infirmity" (New York Times, 2/27). Robert Klein, chair of the Independent Citizens' Oversight Committee, said he believed the court's decision likely would allow for the sale of bonds and full funding allotted for stem cell research in the state. "The decision will help us a great deal in trying to achieve our objective of having the [state] Supreme Court refuse to hear an appeal," Klein said (Los Angeles Times, 2/27). Dana Cody -- executive director of the Life Legal Defense Foundation, which represents People's Advocate, a plaintiff in the lawsuit -- said she is disappointed with the decision and not sure if the plaintiffs would appeal (Johnson, San Jose Mercury News, 2/27). "We're going to read the decision carefully, and then we'll consult with our clients," Cody said, adding, "Chances are we probably will" appeal (Los Angeles Times, 2/27). Schwarzenegger said, "Today's ruling is a victory. I always believed the courts would uphold the will of California voters." He added, "I'm also proud of California's leadership. We have already awarded the first round of grants to researchers to begin work on this potentially life-saving science" (Schwarzenegger release, 2/26). Schwarzenegger has said he would authorize more loans to the agency as necessary (Kravets, AP/Houston Chronicle, 2/27).

The ruling is available online.