Shielding Science: The Scientific Integrity Act and Enforcing Firewalls Between Science and Politics
During the Dump administration, civil servants, watchdogs, and elected officials repeatedly accused political appointees of censoring, altering, or otherwise interfering with the work of scientists and civil servants at federal scientific agencies. In deliberate contrast to his predecessor, from, hi...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Columbia journal of law and social problems 2023-01, Vol.56 (4), p.503-555 |
---|---|
1. Verfasser: | |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 555 |
---|---|
container_issue | 4 |
container_start_page | 503 |
container_title | Columbia journal of law and social problems |
container_volume | 56 |
creator | Berman, Emily J |
description | During the Dump administration, civil servants, watchdogs, and elected officials repeatedly accused political appointees of censoring, altering, or otherwise interfering with the work of scientists and civil servants at federal scientific agencies. In deliberate contrast to his predecessor, from, his first day in office, President Biden has stated his commitment to restoring scientific integrity. But is executive action enough? Should Congress complement these executive actions with legislation? If so, how may Congress best provide firewalls between staff at scientific agencies and those who would improperly hinder their work? This Note analyzes the historical context of, limits to, and potential for legislative protections for civil servants at scientific agencies, with particular focus on the recent Scientific Integrity Act. This Act, which has been introduced in each of the three prior Congresses, would insulate staff at scientific agencies from certain kinds of improper political interference. To be more effective, however, a future version of the Act should be revised to include stronger enforcement provisions. To explore the need for and promise of the Scientific Integrity Act, this Note first places the Act in its historical context. This Note then explores limits to other existing protections. Finally, this Note examines the Act itself, arguing that the Act includes key protective provisions but that it will fail to achieve its full purpose unless it adds stronger enforcement mechanisms. These proposed tools would empower relevant officials to better investigate accusations against high-level political officials and create possible consequences for those who violate the Act. |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2862819206</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2862819206</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-p183t-c6ec13b194aed70419296be74415bcf1a20beb6878ad5e5787d7b26a6167c6643</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNo1jk1rAjEYhHNoodb6HwI9LySb7Jtsb1a0FYQW1LPk412NLFm7iUj_fbfVnoaBmWfmjowY46zgdSkeyGNKR8aYqKEaEb8-BGx9iHu6dgGjwxe6OeDV5NAER5cx474P-ZtOXaYmejqPTde7384i9HgxbZvoK-YLYvyn_OU-uzbk4NITuW9Mm3By0zHZLuab2Xux-nhbzqar4sS1yIUDdFxYXkuDXjE53K3BopKSV9Y13JTMogWttPEVVkorr2wJBjgoByDFmDxfuae--zpjyrtjd-7jMLkrNZR6ADIQP_q6UMI</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2862819206</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Shielding Science: The Scientific Integrity Act and Enforcing Firewalls Between Science and Politics</title><source>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>HeinOnline Law Journal Library</source><creator>Berman, Emily J</creator><creatorcontrib>Berman, Emily J</creatorcontrib><description>During the Dump administration, civil servants, watchdogs, and elected officials repeatedly accused political appointees of censoring, altering, or otherwise interfering with the work of scientists and civil servants at federal scientific agencies. In deliberate contrast to his predecessor, from, his first day in office, President Biden has stated his commitment to restoring scientific integrity. But is executive action enough? Should Congress complement these executive actions with legislation? If so, how may Congress best provide firewalls between staff at scientific agencies and those who would improperly hinder their work? This Note analyzes the historical context of, limits to, and potential for legislative protections for civil servants at scientific agencies, with particular focus on the recent Scientific Integrity Act. This Act, which has been introduced in each of the three prior Congresses, would insulate staff at scientific agencies from certain kinds of improper political interference. To be more effective, however, a future version of the Act should be revised to include stronger enforcement provisions. To explore the need for and promise of the Scientific Integrity Act, this Note first places the Act in its historical context. This Note then explores limits to other existing protections. Finally, this Note examines the Act itself, arguing that the Act includes key protective provisions but that it will fail to achieve its full purpose unless it adds stronger enforcement mechanisms. These proposed tools would empower relevant officials to better investigate accusations against high-level political officials and create possible consequences for those who violate the Act.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0010-1923</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: Columbia Journal of Law and Social Problems</publisher><subject>Civil service ; Enforcement ; Government agencies ; Legislation ; Political appointments ; Political power ; Politics ; Presidents ; Science ; Scientists</subject><ispartof>Columbia journal of law and social problems, 2023-01, Vol.56 (4), p.503-555</ispartof><rights>Copyright Columbia Journal of Law and Social Problems Summer 2023</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,12824</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Berman, Emily J</creatorcontrib><title>Shielding Science: The Scientific Integrity Act and Enforcing Firewalls Between Science and Politics</title><title>Columbia journal of law and social problems</title><description>During the Dump administration, civil servants, watchdogs, and elected officials repeatedly accused political appointees of censoring, altering, or otherwise interfering with the work of scientists and civil servants at federal scientific agencies. In deliberate contrast to his predecessor, from, his first day in office, President Biden has stated his commitment to restoring scientific integrity. But is executive action enough? Should Congress complement these executive actions with legislation? If so, how may Congress best provide firewalls between staff at scientific agencies and those who would improperly hinder their work? This Note analyzes the historical context of, limits to, and potential for legislative protections for civil servants at scientific agencies, with particular focus on the recent Scientific Integrity Act. This Act, which has been introduced in each of the three prior Congresses, would insulate staff at scientific agencies from certain kinds of improper political interference. To be more effective, however, a future version of the Act should be revised to include stronger enforcement provisions. To explore the need for and promise of the Scientific Integrity Act, this Note first places the Act in its historical context. This Note then explores limits to other existing protections. Finally, this Note examines the Act itself, arguing that the Act includes key protective provisions but that it will fail to achieve its full purpose unless it adds stronger enforcement mechanisms. These proposed tools would empower relevant officials to better investigate accusations against high-level political officials and create possible consequences for those who violate the Act.</description><subject>Civil service</subject><subject>Enforcement</subject><subject>Government agencies</subject><subject>Legislation</subject><subject>Political appointments</subject><subject>Political power</subject><subject>Politics</subject><subject>Presidents</subject><subject>Science</subject><subject>Scientists</subject><issn>0010-1923</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7UB</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNo1jk1rAjEYhHNoodb6HwI9LySb7Jtsb1a0FYQW1LPk412NLFm7iUj_fbfVnoaBmWfmjowY46zgdSkeyGNKR8aYqKEaEb8-BGx9iHu6dgGjwxe6OeDV5NAER5cx474P-ZtOXaYmejqPTde7384i9HgxbZvoK-YLYvyn_OU-uzbk4NITuW9Mm3By0zHZLuab2Xux-nhbzqar4sS1yIUDdFxYXkuDXjE53K3BopKSV9Y13JTMogWttPEVVkorr2wJBjgoByDFmDxfuae--zpjyrtjd-7jMLkrNZR6ADIQP_q6UMI</recordid><startdate>20230101</startdate><enddate>20230101</enddate><creator>Berman, Emily J</creator><general>Columbia Journal of Law and Social Problems</general><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>4U-</scope><scope>7UB</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88J</scope><scope>8AM</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGRYB</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>K7.</scope><scope>M0O</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2R</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PADUT</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20230101</creationdate><title>Shielding Science: The Scientific Integrity Act and Enforcing Firewalls Between Science and Politics</title><author>Berman, Emily J</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-p183t-c6ec13b194aed70419296be74415bcf1a20beb6878ad5e5787d7b26a6167c6643</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>Civil service</topic><topic>Enforcement</topic><topic>Government agencies</topic><topic>Legislation</topic><topic>Political appointments</topic><topic>Political power</topic><topic>Politics</topic><topic>Presidents</topic><topic>Science</topic><topic>Scientists</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Berman, Emily J</creatorcontrib><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>University Readers</collection><collection>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Social Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Criminal Justice Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Criminology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>ProQuest Criminal Justice (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Criminal Justice</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Social Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Research Library China</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><jtitle>Columbia journal of law and social problems</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Berman, Emily J</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Shielding Science: The Scientific Integrity Act and Enforcing Firewalls Between Science and Politics</atitle><jtitle>Columbia journal of law and social problems</jtitle><date>2023-01-01</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>56</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>503</spage><epage>555</epage><pages>503-555</pages><issn>0010-1923</issn><abstract>During the Dump administration, civil servants, watchdogs, and elected officials repeatedly accused political appointees of censoring, altering, or otherwise interfering with the work of scientists and civil servants at federal scientific agencies. In deliberate contrast to his predecessor, from, his first day in office, President Biden has stated his commitment to restoring scientific integrity. But is executive action enough? Should Congress complement these executive actions with legislation? If so, how may Congress best provide firewalls between staff at scientific agencies and those who would improperly hinder their work? This Note analyzes the historical context of, limits to, and potential for legislative protections for civil servants at scientific agencies, with particular focus on the recent Scientific Integrity Act. This Act, which has been introduced in each of the three prior Congresses, would insulate staff at scientific agencies from certain kinds of improper political interference. To be more effective, however, a future version of the Act should be revised to include stronger enforcement provisions. To explore the need for and promise of the Scientific Integrity Act, this Note first places the Act in its historical context. This Note then explores limits to other existing protections. Finally, this Note examines the Act itself, arguing that the Act includes key protective provisions but that it will fail to achieve its full purpose unless it adds stronger enforcement mechanisms. These proposed tools would empower relevant officials to better investigate accusations against high-level political officials and create possible consequences for those who violate the Act.</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>Columbia Journal of Law and Social Problems</pub><tpages>53</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0010-1923 |
ispartof | Columbia journal of law and social problems, 2023-01, Vol.56 (4), p.503-555 |
issn | 0010-1923 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2862819206 |
source | Worldwide Political Science Abstracts; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; HeinOnline Law Journal Library |
subjects | Civil service Enforcement Government agencies Legislation Political appointments Political power Politics Presidents Science Scientists |
title | Shielding Science: The Scientific Integrity Act and Enforcing Firewalls Between Science and Politics |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-09T23%3A37%3A06IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Shielding%20Science:%20The%20Scientific%20Integrity%20Act%20and%20Enforcing%20Firewalls%20Between%20Science%20and%20Politics&rft.jtitle=Columbia%20journal%20of%20law%20and%20social%20problems&rft.au=Berman,%20Emily%20J&rft.date=2023-01-01&rft.volume=56&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=503&rft.epage=555&rft.pages=503-555&rft.issn=0010-1923&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Cproquest%3E2862819206%3C/proquest%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2862819206&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |