Law Commons^™

A Perspective On The Potential Role Of Neuroscience In The Court, Ruben C. Gur, Oren M. Gur, Arona E. Gur, Alon G. Gur

Fordham Law Review

This Article presents some lessons learned while offering expert testimony on neuroscience in courts. As a biomedical investigator participating in cutting-edge research with clinical and mentoring responsibilities, Dr. Ruben Gur, Ph.D., became involved in court proceedings rather late in his career. Based on the success of Dr. Gur and other research investigators of his generation, who developed and validated advanced methods for linking brain structure and function to behavior, neuroscience findings and procedures became relevant to multiple legal issues, especially related to culpability and mitigation. Dr. Gur found himself being asked to opine in cases where he could contribute expertise …

When Empathy Bites Back: Cautionary Tales From Neuroscience For Capital Sentencing, Sheri Lynn Johnson, Amelia Courtney Hritz, Caisa Elizabeth Royer, John H. Blume

Fordham Law Review

This Article examines the implications of emerging neuroscientific findings regarding empathy for capital trials. We have approached this task with caution because neuroscientists’ understanding of the human brain is still evolving. As with any new field, if neuroscience is completely trusted before it is thoroughly tested, there is a risk of embracing the new phrenology. Given the state of the research, our advice to defense lawyers is quite modest, but we believe that there are some important lessons for lawyers, judges, legislators, and other stakeholders in the capital punishment system.

Seeing Voices: Potential Neuroscience Contributions To A Reconstruction Of Legal Insanity, Jane Campbell Moriarty

Fordham Law Review

Part I of this Article explains the insanity defense in the United States. Next, Part II discusses some of the brain-based research about mental illness, focusing on schizophrenia research. Then, Part III looks at traumatic brain injury and the relationship among injury, cognition, and behavior. Finally, Part IV explains how a new neuroscience-informed standard might better inform our moral decision making about legal insanity.

Neuroscience And The Civil/Criminal Daubert Divide, Erin Murphy

Fordham Law Review

This Article speculates on the course of neuroscience-as-proof with an eye toward the actual admissibility standards that will govern the acceptance of such evidence by courts, not just as a matter of formal law but also as a function of historical custom. Given the legal system’s spotty record with scientific evidence—which is to say, both the demonstrated willingness of the system to admit unproven “science” or to exclude evidence despite a seemingly adequate scientific foundation—the trajectory of neuroscience in the courts cannot be predicted simply by asking about its scientific legitimacy in the abstract. Rather, an observer must ponder whether …

The Overlooked History Of Neurolaw, Francis X. Shen

Fordham Law Review

In this Article, I argue that our field should more readily acknowledge that there is a history to law and neuroscience. A central challenge is whether, and how, we will learn from this history. I do not endeavor here to provide a comprehensive history of brain science and law but rather to highlight a series of four important, yet often overlooked, “moments.” These moments are (1) foundational medico-legal dialogue in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, (2) the introduction of electroencephalography evidence into the legal system in the mid- twentieth century, (3) the use of psychosurgery for violence prevention in …

Too Sick To Be Executed: Shocking Punishment And The Brain, Joel Zivot

Fordham Law Review

Capital punishment, to be lawfully delivered, must occur without needless cruelty. Cruelty, defined in the setting of punishment, will naturally evolve with the maturation of civil society. Cruel punishment will always be a relative standard, and punishment cannot exceed what is morally shocking. In the setting of public executions, observers and victims share an aspect of the experience of punishment. The inmate has little opportunity to evaluate and report back on cruelty in the moments before death. Once dead, the inmate is necessarily silent on the matter. Empathy allows observers to evaluate punishment as cruel or not. Attempts by the …

Neuroscience And Criminal Law: Have We Been Getting It Wrong For Centuries And Where Do We Go From Here?, Elizabeth Bennett

Fordham Law Review

Moral responsibility is the foundation of criminal law. Will the rapid developments in neuroscience and brain imaging crack that foundation—or, perhaps, shatter it completely? Although many scholars have opined on the subject, as far as I have discovered, few come from a front-line perspective.

Young Adulthood As A Transitional Legal Category: Science, Social Change, And Justice Policy, Elizabeth S. Scott, Richard J. Bonnie, Laurence Steinberg

Fordham Law Review

This Article seeks to advance discussions about the potential implications for justice policy of recent neuroscientific, psychological, and sociological research on young adults. In doing so, we emphasize the importance of not exaggerating either the empirical findings or their policy relevance. The available research does not indicate that individuals between the ages of eighteen and twenty are indistinguishable from younger adolescents in attributes relevant to criminal offending and punishment. Thus, we are skeptical on both scientific and pragmatic grounds about the merits of the proposal by some advocates that juvenile court jurisdiction should be categorically extended to age twenty-one. But …

Supervised Release, Sex-Offender Treatment Programs, And Substantive Due Process, Max B. Bernstein

Fordham Law Review

This Note argues that mandated PPG testing should be eliminated as a condition of federal supervised release. The test infringes on a constitutionally protected liberty interest against unwanted bodily intrusions and, as only the Second Circuit has held, any condition of supervised release that infringes on a constitutionally protected right may be mandated only where it is narrowly tailored to serve a compelling government interest. Because there are a number of viable, less intrusive alternatives, PPG testing as it stands today is not narrowly tailored enough to serve a compelling government interest.

Alternative Courts And Drug Treatment: Finding A Rehabilitative Solution For Addicts In A Retributive System, Molly K. Webster

Fordham Law Review

Sentencing drug crimes and treating drug-addicted defendants often stem from contradictory theories of punishment. In the late twentieth century, courts traded rehabilitation for retributive ideals to fight the “War on Drugs.” However, beginning with the Miami-Dade Drug Court, treatment and rehabilitation have returned to the forefront of sentencing policy in traditional and alternative drug courts.

Jurisdictions have implemented a variety of policies designed to treat addiction as opposed to punishing it. Community courts, such as the Red Hook Community Justice Center in Brooklyn, New York, community-panel drug courts, such as the Woodbury County Community Drug Court in Iowa, and Hawaii’s …

Procedural Triage, Matthew J.B. Lawrence

Fordham Law Review

Prior scholarship has assumed that the inherent value of a "day in court" is the same for all claimants, so that when procedural resources (like a jury trial or a hearing) are scarce, they should be rationed the same way for all claimants. That is incorrect. This Article shows that the inherent value of a "day in court" can be far greater for some claimants, such as first-time filers, than for others, such as corporate entities and that it can be both desirable and feasible to take this variation into account in doling out scarce procedural protections. In other words, …

Prejudicial Character Evidence: How The Circuits Apply Old Chief To Federal Rule Of Evidence 403, Hannah J. Goldman

Fordham Law Review

It is a fundamental principle of the American justice system that a defendant should be judged on the facts of the case at issue and not for the defendant's general character or past indiscretions. Federal Rule of Evidence 404, which prohibits character evidence, addresses this issue. Rule 403 represents another principle of the justice system: the legal system favors admissibility of evidence over its exclusion. There are some exceptions to this principle, including when evidence is so highly prejudicial that it outweighs the benefits of its admission. As 404(b) character evidence is almost always highly prejudicial to the defendant, trial …

The Admissibility Of Hearsay Evidence In New York State Sex Offender Civil Commitment Hearings After State V. Floyd Y.: Finding A Balance Between Promoting The General Welfare Of Sexual Assault Victims And Providing Due Process Of Law, Brittany K. Dryer

Fordham Law Review

In twenty states throughout the country, the government may petition for the civil commitment of detained sex offenders after they are released from prison. Although processes differ among the states, the government must generally show at a court proceeding that a detained sex offender both suffers from a mental abnormality and is dangerous and that this combination makes a detained sex offender likely to reoffend. At such court proceedings, both the government and the respondent will present evidence to either the court or the jury on these issues. As in most court proceedings, hearsay evidence is inadmissible at sex offender …

Should The Medium Affect The Message? Legal And Ethical Implications Of Prosecutors Reading Inmate-Attorney Email, Brandon P. Ruben

Fordham Law Review

The attorney-client privilege protects confidential legal communications between a party and her attorney from being used against her, thus encouraging full and frank attorney-client communication. It is a venerable evidentiary principle of American jurisprudence. Unsurprisingly, prosecutors may not eavesdrop on inmate-attorney visits or phone calls or read inmate-attorney postal mail. Courts are currently divided, however, as to whether or not they can forbid prosecutors from reading inmate- attorney email.

This Note explores the cases that address whether federal prosecutors may read inmates’ legal email. As courts have unanimously held, because inmates know that the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) monitors all …