Daubertand the Proper Role for the Courts in Health, Safety, and Environmental Regulation
- 1 July 2005
- journal article
- other
- Published by American Public Health Association in American Journal of Public Health
- Vol. 95 (S1) , S92-S98
- https://doi.org/10.2105/ajph.2004.044545
Abstract
Assigning a Daubert-like gatekeeper role to courts engaged in judicial review of risk assessments prepared by federal agencies is a profoundly bad idea.I describe the role of courts in reviewing regulatory agency decision-making and explore the potential impact of incorporating Daubert principles into administrative law. A Daubert form of judicial review will prevent agencies from employing a "weight of the evidence" approach, forcing them to adopt a "corpuscular" approach that rewards efforts by regulatees to find and exaggerate flaws in individual scientific studies. Consequently, applying Daubert to federal agency decision-making will have a predictable impact on regulatory policy that runs directly counter to the precautionary policies that animate most health, safety, and environmental statutes.Keywords
This publication has 3 references indexed in Scilit:
- Some Thoughts on "Deossifying" the Rulemaking ProcessDuke Law Journal, 1992
- The Perils of Unreasonable Risk: Information, Regulatory Policy, and Toxic Substances ControlColumbia Law Review, 1991
- Taking adoption seriouslySociety, 1990