Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

10th Anniversary Of Supreme Court's Daubert Ruling

Posted by timothy on from the not-dilbert dept.

scraggly codger writes "Slashdot readers might find it interesting to learn about the ongoing legal controversy over the role of federal judges as gatekeepers for scientific evidence in civil and criminal litigation in the US. Ten years ago the Supreme Court provided guidelines for admissibility of scientific evidence in the Daubert ruling. Readers might find it hard to believe from the text of the ruling, but the result has been a huge increase in the power of judges to exclude scientific evidence from presentation to juries, based on what many scientists and other observers consider an incredibly naive (or perhaps merely self-serving) model of science. There's been a spate of news stories covering the topic, perhaps the most prominent in the WSJ of Friday, 27 June, "'Junk Science' Ban Also Keeps Jurors From Sound Evidence" (regrettably not freely available online). I particularly recommend Daubert: The Most Influential Supreme Court Ruling You've Never Heard Of."

5 of 279 comments (clear)

  1. Oh yeah baby by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll
    FrostY postY motherfuckers!!

    w00t!!

  2. self-serving people? in today's age? by chef_raekwon · · Score: 3, Troll

    s consider an incredibly naive (or perhaps merely self-serving) model of science

    i honestly cannot see why anyone would do anything self-serving, especially in the American democratic system, to sway the masses....(wmd-gwb)..

    --
    We're like rats, in some experiment! -- George Costanza
    1. Re:self-serving people? in today's age? by chef_raekwon · · Score: -1, Troll

      weapons of mass destruction-George W Bush

      --
      We're like rats, in some experiment! -- George Costanza
  3. Hey! This makes sense! by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 0, Troll
    This makes a lot of sense. Why would someone with lots of money be trounced by poorly-paid scientists who have the incredible guts to imply that the rich guy is not right????

    After this is America, where "In gold we trust"...

  4. Re:Considering that it took them 17 years to ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    So, how long were you in jail for taking it in the ass. I bet you got more dick in prison than out.