Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=721363
 
 

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

Abstract:     
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

working papers series


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: 4,277
Downloads: 570
Download Rank: 25,712
Citations:  4
Footnotes:  196

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo5 in 0.328 seconds