PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to Subcommittee on Patents, Copyrights and Trademarks.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Feb 18, 1993
Life Patenting Moratorium Act of 1993 - Amends Federal patent law to prohibit human beings, organs, or organ subparts or genetically engineered animals from being considered patentable subject matter. Imposes a two-year moratorium on the patentability of human tissues, fluids, cells, genes or gene sequences, or animals or animal organisms (genetically engineered or otherwise). Authorizes the continuation of such moratorium after such time pursuant to the Public Health Service Act. Expresses the sense of the Congress that: (1) legislation addressing the implications of genetic research should be thoroughly studied and passed by the Congress as soon as possible; and (2) the Departments of Commerce and State and the National Institutes of Health should work with the international community to develop international standards relating to the patenting of, and access to, genetic information.
People & committees
Sen. Hatfield, Mark O. [R-OR] · R–OR
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to Subcommittee on Patents, Copyrights and Trademarks.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Judiciary.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 10, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze S.387 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine S.387 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine S.387 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine S.387 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.