The debate over whether or not to allow some form of human cloning in this country is at a standstill in the U.S. Senate, but that hasn't kept some states from deciding what will be permissible within their own borders. Last year North Dakota became the latest of five states to ban all forms of human cloning. Two states, California and Rhode Island, have banned initiating a pregnancy using cloned human embryos.

New Jersey has become the most recent state to take a stand on the issue of embryo research and cloning. Bill S1909/A2840, which was signed by Governor James McGreevey on Sunday, January 4, was advertised as one where embryonic stem cell research would be promoted and human cloning banned. Unfortunately, as is often true in politics, what the public was told the law covered was rather different than what it is really about. Today, the Garden State is the one place in the country where it is now expressly permissible to create, implant, and gestate a human clone--as long as you kill it either at birth or sometime soon thereafter.

The new law states,

"Derivation and use of human embryonic stem cells, human embryonic germ cells and human adult stem cells from any source, including somatic cell nuclear transplantation, shall be permitted in this State...."1

Though maybe not well known to the general public, the term "somatic cell nuclear transplantation" is a scientific term for cloning. In other words, it is now explicitly permissible in New Jersey to clone human embryos in order to obtain their embryonic stem cells or germ cells. This is also expressly legal in California.

Interestingly though, the New Jersey law also allows "human adult stem cells" to be secured from cloned or normal embryos. However, adult stem cells don't develop in an embryo for several weeks after creation. For example, bone marrow, which holds the stem cells that make blood, don't develop until 16-20 weeks gestation.2 Since it is not currently possible to grow an embryo outside of a woman's womb to the stage where adult stem cells develop, a normal or cloned embryo would have to be implanted into a woman's uterus and then later aborted in order to secure these cells.

The new law also states,

"A person who knowingly engages or assists, directly or indirectly, in the cloning of a human being is guilty of a crime of the first degree. As used in this section, 'cloning of a human being' means the replication of a human individual by cultivating a cell with genetic material through the egg, embryo, fetal and newborn stages into a new human individual."3

This language gives permission to researchers to clone a human embryo, implant into a woman's uterus, and gestate it up to the ninth month of pregnancy. It only requires that the clone be destroyed at birth (or soon thereafter depending upon the definition of "newborn stage").

To say that this new law is extreme seems modest. As far as I'm aware, it is the most permissible law that expressly allows human cloning in the world. And the "ban" on cloning that does exist in this bill is essentially powerless. No state government is going to be successful at forcing a woman who is pregnant to have an abortion against her will, even if she is carrying a human clone.

A leader of the pro-choice movement told me a couple of years ago that she opposed all human cloning because as soon as a clone was implanted into a woman who wanted to carry it to term, she would switch sides and support that woman's right to reproductive freedom. It was something she hoped to avoid. I suspect that a case like this would attract every pro-choice organization in the country to back a woman's court challenge against this law.

One major proponent of this legislation has been the politically powerful (and rich) Biotechnology Industry Organization (BIO). In a field of research where legislative limits can severely hinder a company's ability to raise venture capital or pursue any line of research desired, setting up shop in a state who does not have clear governing laws of biotechnology is risky. New Jersey hopes that by establishing clear-cut freedoms for firms to manipulate human embryos however they want will attract new biotech companies (and the resulting tax revenue and jobs) to the state.

To this end, New Jersey went even further and created a market in embryonic and fetal body parts by allowing "reasonable payment" for "removal, processing, disposal, preservation, quality control, storage, transplantation, or implantation of embryonic or cadaveric fetal tissue." While it banned "valuable consideration" (profiteering) from such transactions, Gerard Bradley of Notre Dame Law School pointed out in an analysis of the bill that, "excluding 'reasonable payment' renders the ban toothless. There is no meaningful difference between 'valuable consideration' and 'reasonable payment' for such varied services having no objective market value."4 [emphasis his]

The New Jersey Senate loved this bill. They voted 25-0 for it. It was a bit more difficult in the New Jersey Assembly. The legislation had originally been introduced in November 2002, but was pulled from consideration after the extreme nature of the bill was made public. It was revived after the 2003 state elections in a lame duck session when legislators were either retiring, had lost their race the month before, or wouldn't have to face the voters for two years when the issue might be forgotten. In the end, the bill was approved 41-31 with 7 abstentions.

Though the media seems to have missed out on this story, this law's passage marks a very dark day indeed. BIO has proven that the public is either asleep or just doesn't know enough to care about the biotech companies who are quietly ushering in a new tyranny of human exploitation for profit. We're allowing them to turn the youngest of us into natural resources to be plundered. Where will the new tyranny go next? When will we marshal the resources to stop it?

References

1 New Jersey Senate Bill S1909, http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/2002/Bills/S2000/1909_R1.HTM, and New Jersey Assembly Bill A2840, http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/2002/Bills/A3000/2840_R1.HTM. Accessed January 7, 2004.

2 Michejda, M, "Which stem cells should be used for transplantation?" Fetal Diagnosis and Therapy, 2004;19(1):2-8.

3 New Jersey Senate Bill S1909, http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/2002/Bills/S2000/1909_R1.HTM, and New Jersey Assembly Bill A2840, http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/2002/Bills/A3000/2840_R1.HTM. Accessed January 7, 2004.

4 Letter from Gerard Bradley, Notre Dame Law School to Marie Tasy, New Jersey Right to Life, http://www.njrtl.org/ndlawletter.php. Accessed January 7, 2004.