Missourians Against Human Cloning v. Carnahan
Missouri Court of Appeals
1Dissent
JAMES M. SMART, JR., Judge,
concurring in part and dissenting in part.
The controversy in this case is about a phrase that has become a shibboleth of both sides of the debate about somatic cell nuclear transfer. Because of the frequent use of the phrase “human cloning” in inconsistent ways in the legal and political controversies about somatic cell nuclear transfer (“nuclear transfer” for convenience), the ballot summary, standing alone, does not provide sufficient reference or context to clarify the meaning of the phrase and will tend to mislead those who are philosophically opposed to all…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Constitutional Prohibitory AmendmentSupreme Court of Kansas · 1881
- Missourians to Protect the Initiative Process v. BluntSupreme Court of Missouri · 1990
- Bergman v. MillsMissouri Court of Appeals · 1999
- Edwards v. LesueurSupreme Court of Missouri · 1896
- United Labor Committee of Mo. v. KirkpatrickSupreme Court of Missouri · 1978
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.