Laboratory of Justice: The Supreme Court's 200-Year Struggle to Integrate Science and the Law
From the American Revolution to the genetic revolution, the U.S. Supreme Court's uneasy attempts to weave science into the Constitution
Suppose that scientists identify a gene that predicts that a person is likely to commit a serious crime. Laws are then passed making genetic tests mandatory, and anyone displaying the gene is sent to a treatment facility. Would the laws be constitutional?
In this illuminating history, legal scholar David L. Faigman reveals the tension between the conservative nature of the law and the swift evolution of scientific knowledge. The Supreme Court works by precedent, embedding the science of an earlier time into our laws. In the nineteenth century, biology helped settle the "race question" in the famous Dred Scott case; not until a century later would cutting-edge sociological data end segregation with Brown v. Board of Education. In 1973 Roe v. Wade set a standard for the viability of a fetus that modern medicine could render obsolete. And how does the Fourth Amendment apply in a world filled with high-tech surveillance devices?
To ensure our liberties, Faigman argues, the Court must embrace science, turning to the lab as well as to precedent.
What people are saying - Write a review
Laboratory of justice: the Supreme Court's 200-year struggle to integrate science and the lawUser Review - Not Available - Book Verdict
Arguing that "Constitutional law is rife with empirical propositions," Faigman (law, Univ. of California, Hastings; Legal Alchemy) examines how empirical evidence from natural and social sciences ... Read full review
Other editions - View all
abortion adversative method Aguillard American Anti-Federalists argued argument basic basis believed Blackmun Breyer Brown Cardozo Chief Justice citizens civil claim Clause Congress considered constitutional law constitutionally creation science debate decision democracy differences discrimination dissenting Dred Scott Earl Warren empirical equal protection experience fact factual federal Federalists Felix Frankfurter Fourteenth Amendment Frankfurter Ginsburg guaranteed Hamilton Harvard Hialeah Holmes's Ibid interest Japanese Jefferson judges judicial jurisprudence Justice Scalia Korematsu law school Legal Realism legislative liberty Louis Brandeis Madison Marshall McCleskey ment NAACP nature nude dancing O'Connor Oliver Wendell Holmes opinion person peyote Plessy political practice principle prohibited psychological question race racial realists reason regulations Rehnquist religion religious Renton rule scientific secondary effects segregation slavery society sought Souter speech statute strict scrutiny Supreme Court Taney tion trial court United viability Virginia vote Warren women wrote York