{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02096924510717614, 'fraction_numerical': 0.005125815470643057, 'mean_word_length': 5.014005602240896, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Baa, baa cloned sheep, have you any law? Legislative responses to animal cloning in the European Union and the United States.

INTRODUCTION Nearly a century ago, before the scientific technology that could make it a widespread practice began to emerge, the word clone came into English parlance. 1 In its simplest form, cloning refers to any process that produces genetically identical organisms. 2 Scientists and science fiction writers have long been captivated by the potential cloning holds for reengineering society.3 But the accelerated pace of cloning research in animals over the last two decades has resulted in a sudden dilemma for lawmakers. In February 1997, Scottish researchers reported the first successful cloning of an animal from an adult celJ.4 This event, and the cloned sheep named Dolly who resulted from it, inspired rapid and public reaction from governing bodies worldwide, including those of the European Union (EU) and United States (U.S.).5 Proposed cloning legislation in the EU specifically addresses the issues of animal cloning, building on a history of regulating. ethical and humane treatment for animals used in scientific research. 6 But legislation proposed by the U.S. reflects an ongoing failure to protect certain types of animals from research exploitation, and does not satisfactorily address the ethical issues bound up with cloning animals. 7 Part I of this Note examines the history of animal cloning and previous legislation concerning animal research in the EU and U.S., ending at the point where researchers successfully cloned an adult sheep and lawmakers saw a need for immediate legislation on the issues thus raised. Part II focuses on the EU and U.S. legislative responses , paying particular attention to the considerations prioritized by each and the ways in which these responses built on previous legislation. Part III compares and criticizes the two approaches based on their common assumptions. Finally, Part IV concludes that the U.S. approach to cloning legislation is insufficient, and suggests that a proposal incorporating elements of the EU's draft legislation would be preferable.