Scientific Responsibility and the Law

Because public policy is implicated by scientific misconduct, the legal profession should be interested in overcoming this problem. This Article studies the scientific misconduct problem and provides a personal view of the legal dilemmas that confront those who report misconduct. Part I describes how the scientific community currently deals with alleged fraud. Scientists primarily rely on the peer review system and toothless guidelines. Part II illustrates the problems in the present system through a case study of an allegation of misconduct. The author represented a man who reported scientific misconduct; the National Institutes of Health (NIH) investigation took five and one-half years. This Article concludes that lawyers should become more involved in the investigation and adjudication of scientific fraud to assist the scientific community in preserving the due process rights of the accused, maintaining the integrity of the scientific community, and encouraging exposure of misconduct

Nuclear Power: Risk, Liability, and Indemnity

In 1946, the Congress of the United States enacted the original Atomic Energy Act as the framework for development, control, and use of atomic energy. This Act provided for the transfer to the new Atomic Energy Commission (AEC), a civilian agency, of the entire atomic energy program which to that point had been conducted by the Manhattan Engineer District, a creature of the United States Army. The Act contemplated that the heart of the nuclear technology-the production of special nuclear material and the use of special nuclear material in both military and civil applications- would be a government monopoly. All special nuclear material in existence and to come into existence was to be owned by the government, and private persons were prohibited from owning or possessing special nuclear material and facilities for producing or utilizing special nuclear material