Many courts have lax standards for evidence and judges who abandon their role as gatekeepers, resulting in an abundance of “junk science” presented to jurors.

Why It’s a Problem

Junk science is especially common in mass tort litigation regarding the glyphosate-based roundup weed killer and talcum baby powder.

Juries and judges should have access to the most complete and accurate evidence during trials and be presented with scientifically and factually accurate information to allow them to make well-informed decisions.

What Can Be Done

Support implementation of Federal Rule of Evidence 702 in courts, requiring that theories must be based on sound scientific method.

The Rule 702 standard is utilized in the federal court system and by a majority of states.

Judges must follow applicable laws regarding evidentiary standards if they are in place in their state.

News on Junk Science

March 8, 2023 Washington Examiner Op-Ed: The 3rd Circuit’s bankruptcy gift to the trial bar

February 10, 2023 Wall Street Journal Letter-to-the-Editor: Lawyers Win Big From J&J Bankruptcy Decision

January 9, 2023 Agri-Pulse Op-Ed: Trial lawyers target agriculture products in ‘Judicial Hellholes’

December 6, 2022 Press Release – St. Louis ‘Judicial Hellhole’ Judges Permit ‘Junk’ Science Evidence, Known Haven for Trial Lawyers

October 10, 2022 Washington Times Op-Ed: Monsanto’s triumph over junk science

September 28, 2022 Bloomberg Law Op-Ed: When Plaintiffs’ Attorneys Mislead the Public

June 23, 2020 Press Release – Federal Judge Takes Stand Against Junk Science in California