Daubert and the proper role for the courts in health, safety, and environmental regulation

T.O. McGarity

American Journal of Public Health, 2005, vol. 95, issue S1, S92-S98

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 decisionmaking 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 decisionmaking will have a predictable impact on regulatory policy that runs directly counter to the precautionary policies that animate most health, safety, and environmental statutes.

Date: 2005
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.2105/AJPH.2004.044545

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:aph:ajpbhl:10.2105/ajph.2004.044545_2

DOI: 10.2105/AJPH.2004.044545

Access Statistics for this article

American Journal of Public Health is currently edited by Alfredo Morabia

More articles in American Journal of Public Health from American Public Health Association
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Christopher F Baum ().