Citations (4)


Footnotes (196)



The New Censorship: Institutional Review Boards

Philip Hamburger

Columbia University - Law School

May 2005

U of Chicago, Public Law Working Paper No. 95

Are federal regulations on Institutional Review Boards - commonly known as IRBs - compatible with the First Amendment? The regulations aim to protect human subjects by creating a system of licensing research. Under this system, universities establish IRBs, and researchers must get the prior permission of an IRB before doing research on human subjects. At first glance, it may seem only appropriate that researchers should get permission before performing research on human beings. The First Amendment, however, prohibits the federal government from imposing a system of licensing speech or the press, and it therefore seems necessary to consider whether the regulations on IRBs are unconstitutional.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 85

Keywords: First Amendment, Censorship, Academic Freedom, Institutional Review Boards, Unconstitutional Conditions

JEL Classification: I18, K10, K32

Open PDF in Browser Download This Paper

Date posted: May 17, 2005  

Suggested Citation

Hamburger, Philip, The New Censorship: Institutional Review Boards (May 2005). U of Chicago, Public Law Working Paper No. 95. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=721363 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.721363

Contact Information

Philip Hamburger (Contact Author)
Columbia University - Law School ( email )
435 West 116th Street
New York, NY 10025
United States
Feedback to SSRN

Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 4,731
Downloads: 606
Download Rank: 31,597
Citations:  4
Footnotes:  196

© 2016 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollobot1 in 1.078 seconds