10 U.S.C. § 980

Limitation on use of humans as experimental subjects

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 10 CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Funds appropriated to the Department of Defense may not be used for research involving a human being as an experimental subject unless—(1) the informed consent of the subject is obtained in advance; or(2) in the case of research intended to be beneficial to the subject, the informed consent of the subject or a legal representative of the subject is obtained in advance.(b)(1) The Secretary of Defense may waive the prohibition in this section with respect to a specific research project to advance the development of a medical product necessary to the armed forces if the research project may directly benefit the subject and is carried out in accordance with all other applicable laws.(2) The Secretary may delegate the authority provided by paragraph (1) to the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering.(Added Pub. L. 98–525, title XIV, § 1401(c)(1), Oct. 19, 1984, 98 Stat. 2615; amended Pub. L. 107–107, div. A, title VII, § 733, Dec. 28, 2001, 115 Stat. 1170; Pub. L. 118–31, div. A, title II, § 212, Dec. 22, 2023, 137 Stat. 183.)Editorial NotesPrior Provisions

Provisions similar to those in this section were contained in the following appropriation acts:

Pub. L. 98–473, title I, § 101(h) [title VIII, § 8029], Oct. 12, 1984, 98 Stat. 1904, 1929.

Pub. L. 98–212, title VII, § 734, Dec. 8, 1983, 97 Stat. 1444.

Pub. L. 97–377, title I, § 101(c) [title VII, § 737], Dec. 21, 1982, 96 Stat. 1833, 1857.

Pub. L. 97–114, title VII, § 738, Dec. 29, 1981, 95 Stat. 1585.

Pub. L. 96–527, title VII, § 739, Dec. 15, 1980, 94 Stat. 3088.

Pub. L. 96–154, title VII, § 741, Dec. 21, 1979, 93 Stat. 1159.

Pub. L. 95–457, title VIII, § 841, Oct. 13, 1978, 92 Stat. 1251.

Pub. L. 95–111, title VIII, § 840, Sept. 21, 1977, 91 Stat. 906.

Pub. L. 94–419, title VII, § 739, Sept. 22, 1976, 90 Stat. 1297.

Pub. L. 94–212, title VII, § 740, Feb. 9, 1976, 90 Stat. 175.

Pub. L. 93–437, title VIII, § 841, Oct. 8, 1974, 88 Stat. 1231.

Pub. L. 93–238, title VII, § 743, Jan. 2, 1974, 87 Stat. 1045.

Pub. L. 92–570, title VII, § 745, Oct. 26, 1972, 86 Stat. 1203.

Amendments

2023—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 118–31 designated existing provisions as par. (1) and added par. (2).

2001—Pub. L. 107–107 designated existing provisions as subsec. (a) and added subsec. (b).

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date

Section effective Oct. 1, 1985, see section 1404 of Pub. L. 98–525, set out as a note under section 520b of this title.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 14 cases (10 in the last 5 years), 1991–2025 · leading case: John Doe v. Louis W. Sullivan, M.D., Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., 938 F.2d 1370 (D.C. Cir. 1991).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

John Doe v. Louis W. Sullivan, M.D., Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., 938 F.2d 1370 (D.C. Cir. 1991). · cites it 4× “2492, 2615 (1984) (codified at 10 U.S.C. § 980 ). 6 Third, Doe alleged that the government’s use of drugs on a nonconsenting person constitutes a substantial deprivation of that person’s liberty and therefore violates the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment.”

Doe v. Sullivan, 756 F. Supp. 12 (D.D.C. 1991). “Plaintiffs argue that the DoD’s use of unapproved drugs constitutes “research.” They stress that, under FDA regulations, the DoD must collect data on the efficacy of the unapproved drugs.”

Bridges v. The Methodist Hosp. (S.D. Tex. 2024). · cites it 10× “10 U.S.C. § 980 Plaintiffs also invoke 10 U.”

Boysen v. Peacehealth (D. Or. 2024). · cites it 4× “Part 46, the Belmont Report, Article VI of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (“ICCPR”) Treaty, 10 U.S.C. § 980 , Federal Wide Assurance, and the CDC COVID-19 Vaccination Program Provider Agreement.”

Curtis v. Inslee (W.D. Wash. 2024). · cites it 4× “Part 46, the 22 Belmont Report, Article VI of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 23 (“ICCPR”) Treaty, 10 U.S.C. § 980 , Federal Wide Assurance, and the CDC COVID-19 24 1 Vaccination Program Provider Agreement, the December 21, 2023 order held that these 2…”

Curtis v. Inslee (9th Cir. 2025). · cites it 4× “§ 360bbb-3, 10 U.S.C. § 980 , 42 U.S.C. § 247d-6, Article VII of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 45 C.”

Timken v. South Denver Cardiology Assocs. (10th Cir. 2025). · cites it 4× “10 U.S.C. § 980 The next statutory claim runs through 10 U.”

Sweeney v. Univ. of Colorado Hosp. Auth. (10th Cir. 2025). · cites it 4× “10 U.S.C. § 980 The next statutory claim runs through 10 U.”

Curtis v. Inslee (W.D. Wash. 2023). · cites it 3× “Part 46, 3 the Belmont Report, Article VI of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 4 (“ICCPR”) Treaty, 10 U.S.C. § 980 , Federal Wide Assurance, and the CDC COVID-19 5 Vaccination Program Provider Agreement.”

Roberts v. Governor Jay Inslee (E.D. Wash. 2024). · cites it 2× “§ 360bbb-3, Article VII of the ICCPR Treaty, 6 Federal Wide Assurance, 10 U.S.C. § 980 , EUA Scope of Authorization letters, 7 and the Fourteenth Amendment.”

United States v. Colon (N.M.C.C.A. 2016). “PER CURIAM: Pursuant to his pleas, a military judge convicted the appellant at a general court-martial of one specification of attempted sexual assault of a child and two specifications of attempted sexual abuse of a child, in violation of Article 80, Uniform Code of Military…”

United States v. Sundstrum (A.F.C.C.A. 2020). “specifications of attempting to use and distribute 1-propionyl-lysergic acid di- ethylamide (1P-LSD), one specification of wrongful possession of a controlled substance (psilocybin), and two specifications of wrongfully using and distrib- uting 4-Acetoxy-N-N-dimethyltryptamine…”

Show all 14 citing cases →

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.