How Do Lawyers Relate to Science Literacy? A New Methodological Framework

Authored by: Sarah L. Cooper

Abstract

Science helps the law to understand the world in which law and legal policy must operate.  Yet, it is widely recognized that both law and science approach the truth in different ways: law must provide finality and stability, “whereas science is encouraged to embrace new ideas so that we can better understand the natural world.”  The criminal justice system’s use of forensic science identification techniques, like tool-mark, bite-mark and fingerprint analysis, illustrate how these differences can have challenging consequences. The law can misuse science, be skeptical towards change, and narrowly interpret what is rational.  These approaches can contribute to wrongful convictions and be exacerbated by lawyers having limited options for science education and training.

Identifying strategies to enhance these educational and training options is important because of the competencies necessary for the practice of law.  Lawyers make key calls about scientific evidence at all stages of its journey through the criminal justice system—its selection, how it is presented and challenged, and how it will inform case strategy.  Moreover, lawyers can become judges who then make other key decisions, such as what precedent to follow or shape regarding admissibility, the boundaries of direct and cross-examination of expert witnesses, and the tools lawyers can use in both pursuits.  The concept of science literacy—the “disposition and knowledge needed to engage with science”—is relevant to these competencies, and this Article proposes that understanding how lawyers relate to this concept, in terms of how it is relevant and useful to their practice, could inform the development of more meaningful science training and education packages.

This Article presents a new methodological framework for investigating how lawyers relate to the concept of science literacy.  Part I sets the scene for the new framework, describing how law and science intersect generally and specifically in terms of the United States criminal justice system’s use of forensic science techniques.  Part I then explains how uncertainty at that intersection, catalyzed by scientific progress around DNA evidence, has been addressed, guardedly, by criminal courts in ways that illuminate the different approaches law and science take to the world.  Part II defines science literacy and maps its relevance to legal practice and concerns about lawyers’ scientific expertise in the context of criminal justice and forensics.  Part II then makes a case for why a new framework for investigating how lawyers relate to science literacy, in the context of legal practice, could help to reconcile those differences.  Part III presents the framework, which harnesses the National Academy of Sciences’ conceptualization of science literacy, and its call for research that focuses on societal systems, community structures, and the relevance of science literacy to daily life.