Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Public Perception Of The #Geneeditedbabies Event Across Multiple Social Media Platforms: Observational Study, Ellen W. Clayton, Congning Ni, Et Al.
The Public Perception Of The #Geneeditedbabies Event Across Multiple Social Media Platforms: Observational Study, Ellen W. Clayton, Congning Ni, Et Al.
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
In November 2018, a Chinese researcher reported that his team had applied clustered regularly interspaced palindromic repeats or associated protein 9 to delete the gene C-C chemokine receptor type 5 from embryos and claimed that the 2 newborns would have lifetime immunity from HIV infection, an event referred to as #GeneEditedBabies on social media platforms. Although this event stirred a worldwide debate on ethical and legal issues regarding clinical trials with embryonic gene sequences, the focus has mainly been on academics and professionals. However, how the public, especially stratified by geographic region and culture, reacted to these issues is not …
The Future Of Law And Neuroscience, Owen D. Jones
The Future Of Law And Neuroscience, Owen D. Jones
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
I was asked to speculate about where the field of Law and Neuroscience may be ten years from now. In that spirit (and while recognizing that the future rarely complies with our predictions) I attempt here some extrapolations. I first consider potential advances in the technologies for monitoring and manipulating brain states, the techniques for analyzing brain data, and the efforts to further integrate relevant fields. I then consider potential neurolaw developments relevant to: (1) detecting things law cares about; (2) individualizing developmental states and brain states; (3) evidence-based legal reforms; (4) legal decision-making; and (5) brain-brain interfaces.
The Consensus Rule: A New Approach To Scientific Evidence, Edward K. Cheng
The Consensus Rule: A New Approach To Scientific Evidence, Edward K. Cheng
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
Founded on good intentions but unrealistic expectations, the dominant Daubert framework for handling expert and scientific evidence should be scrapped. Daubert asks judges and jurors to make substantively expert determinations, a task they are epistemically incompetent to perform as laypersons. As an alternative, this Article proposes a new framework for handling expert evidence. It draws from the social and philosophical literature on expertise and begins with a basic question: How can laypersons make intelligent decisions about expert topics? From there, it builds its evidentiary approach, which ultimately results in an inference rule focused on expert communities. Specifically, when dealing with …