Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 13 of 13
Full-Text Articles in Law
Correctional Change Through Neuroscience, Arielle R. Baskin-Sommers, Karelle Fonteneau
Correctional Change Through Neuroscience, Arielle R. Baskin-Sommers, Karelle Fonteneau
Fordham Law Review
Currently, the U.S. criminal justice system is under intense scrutiny. High- profile cases question the appropriateness of specific types of evidence, decision making in sentencing, and the treatment of convicted offenders. Clearly, these issues are not new. And, as has been historically the case, the justice system looks toward science for assistance in addressing and redressing problems with the delivery of justice.
How Prosecutors And Defense Attorneys Differ In Their Use Of Neuroscience Evidence, Deborah W. Denno
How Prosecutors And Defense Attorneys Differ In Their Use Of Neuroscience Evidence, Deborah W. Denno
Fordham Law Review
Much of the public debate surrounding the intersection of neuroscience and criminal law is based on assumptions about how prosecutors and defense attorneys differ in their use of neuroscience evidence. For example, according to some commentators, the defense’s use of neuroscience evidence will abdicate criminals of all responsibility for their offenses. In contrast, the prosecution’s use of that same evidence will unfairly punish the most vulnerable defendants as unfixable future dangers to society. This “double- edged sword” view of neuroscience evidence is important for flagging concerns about the law’s construction of criminal responsibility and punishment: it demonstrates that the same …
A Glimpse Inside The Brain’S Black Box: Understanding The Role Of Neuroscience In Criminal Sentencing, Bernice B. Donald, Erica Bakies
A Glimpse Inside The Brain’S Black Box: Understanding The Role Of Neuroscience In Criminal Sentencing, Bernice B. Donald, Erica Bakies
Fordham Law Review
This Article begins by discussing what neuroscience and the smaller associated field of study, neuropsychology, are and what they can tell us about an individual. It then recounts a brief history of sentencing in the United States. Additionally, it expounds on how the legal system currently utilizes neuroscience in the courts, noting specifically the ways in which neuroscience can be presented during the sentencing phase of trial. Finally, it discusses the use of neuroscience as a mitigating factor during sentencing and how judges can use neuroscience to combat their implicit biases.
Can Neuroscience Help Predict Future Antisocial Behavior?, Lyn M. Gaudet, Jason P. Kerkmans, Nathaniel E. Anderson, Kent A. Kiehl
Can Neuroscience Help Predict Future Antisocial Behavior?, Lyn M. Gaudet, Jason P. Kerkmans, Nathaniel E. Anderson, Kent A. Kiehl
Fordham Law Review
Part I of this Article reviews the tools currently available to predict antisocial behavior. Part II discusses legal precedent regarding the use of, and challenges to, various prediction methods. Part III introduces recent neuroscience work in this area and reviews two studies that have successfully used neuroimaging techniques to predict recidivism. Part IV discusses some criticisms that are commonly levied against the various prediction methods and highlights the disparity between the attitudes of the scientific and legal communities toward risk assessment generally and neuroscience specifically. Lastly, Part V explains why neuroscience methods will likely continue to help inform and, ideally, …
Neuroscience And Sentencing, Nancy Gertner
Neuroscience And Sentencing, Nancy Gertner
Fordham Law Review
This symposium comes at a propitious time for me. I am reviewing the sentences I was obliged to give to hundreds of men—mostly African American men—over the course of a seventeen-year federal judicial career. As I have written elsewhere, I believe that 80 percent of the sentences that I imposedwereunfair,unjust,anddisproportionate. EverythingthatIthought was important—that neuroscientists, for example, have found to be salient in affecting behavior—was irrelevant to the analysis I was supposed to conduct. My goal—for which this symposium plays an important part—is to reevaluate those sentences now under a more rational and humane system, this time at least informed by …
A Perspective On The Potential Role Of Neuroscience In The Court, Ruben C. Gur, Oren M. Gur, Arona E. Gur, Alon G. Gur
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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 …