The limits of government regulation of science

Science

Volumn 335, Issue 6072, 2012, Pages 1047-1049

  Kraemer, John D ^a,b   Gostin, Lawrence O ^b  

^a GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY LAW CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK; NATIONAL SECURITY; PUBLISHING; REGULATORY FRAMEWORK; RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT; SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY; STATE ROLE;

COURT; FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT; GOVERNMENT; GOVERNMENT REGULATION; HUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLICATION; RESEARCH; SHORT SURVEY; UNITED STATES; ACCESS TO INFORMATION; ARTICLE; BIOLOGICAL WARFARE; FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT; HAZARDOUS WASTE; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; LEGAL ASPECT; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; PUBLIC HEALTH; PUBLISHING;

ACCESS TO INFORMATION; BIOTERRORISM; CONTAINMENT OF BIOHAZARDS; FEDERAL GOVERNMENT; FINANCING, GOVERNMENT; GOVERNMENT REGULATION; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; PUBLIC HEALTH; PUBLISHING; RESEARCH; RESEARCH SUPPORT AS TOPIC; SECURITY MEASURES; UNITED STATES; UNITED STATES DEPT. OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES;

EID: 84857685585     PISSN: 00368075     EISSN: 10959203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1126/science.1219215     Document Type: Short Survey

References (24)

1. D. Grady, W. J. Broad, New York Times, 21 December 2011, p. A1.
2. United States v. Progressive, Inc., 467 F. Supp. 990 (1979).
3. Letter from Stewart Simonson to Bruce Alberts, 27 May 2005; www.fas.org/sgp/bush/hhs052705.pdf.
4. Board of Trustees of Leland Stanford Jr. University v. Sullivan, 773 F. Supp. 472 (1991).
5. Bantam Books v. Sullivan, 372 U.S. 58 (1963).
6. NIH, Press statement on NSABB review of H5N1 Research (20 December 2011); www.nih.gov/news/health/dec2011/ od-20.htm.
7. Snepp v. United States, 444 U.S. 507 (1980).
8. N.Y. Times v. United States, 403 U.S. 713 (1971).
9. A. Chamberlain, Science and Security in the Post-9/11 Environment-Export Controls: Grants, Contracts, and Publishing (American Association for the Advancement of Science, Washington, DC, 2004); www.aaas.org/spp/ post911/grants.
10. Alliance for Open Society International v. USAID (2nd Cir. 2011).
11. Rust v. Sullivan, 500 U.S. 173 (1991).
12. Rumsfeld v. Forum for Academic and Institutional Rights, Inc., 547 U.S. 47 (2006).
13. Letter from R. Richard Newcomb (OCAF) to Nelson G. Dong, 2 April 2004; www.ieee.org/documents/ OFAC-40204-Letter.pdf.
14. IEEE, OFAC Background; www.ieee.org/about/corporate/ compliance/ regulatory/ofac/background.html.
15. T. J. Chin, New York Univ. Law Rev. 83, 1883 (2008).
16. Forsham v. Harris, 445 U.S. 169 (1980).
17. Office of Management and Budget, Revised circular 110A; www.whitehouse.gov/omb/circulars-a110.
18. Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. §552.
19. Executive Order 13526, Classified National Security Information (2009).
20. Executive Order 13556, Controlled Unclassified Information (2010).
21. National Research Council, Biotechnology Research in an Age of Terrorism (National Academies Press, Washington, DC, 2004).
22. D. G. Goldenson, Boston Coll. Environ. Aff. Law Rev. 29, 311 (2001-2002).
23. M. Steffan, The high cost of keeping a secret, Washington Post, ideas@innovation [blog], 13 October 2011.
24. J. P. Fitzpatrick, M. A. Pustay, Guidance regarding Controlled Unclassified Information and the Freedom of Information Act [memorandum], 22 November 2011; www.fas.org/sgp/cui/foia112211.pdf.