The Courts as Gatekeeper of Big Data Evidence

Dwight Steward () and Roberto Cavazos ()
Additional contact information
Dwight Steward: EmployStats
Roberto Cavazos: University of Baltimore

Chapter Chapter 4 in Big Data Analytics in U.S. Courts, 2019, pp 57-67 from Palgrave Macmillan

Abstract: Abstract From 1923 until 1993, the admissibility of scientific evidence in the federal court system was governed by the standard set forth in Frye v. United States. In applying this standard, courts examined whether the proffered evidence had “gained general acceptance” in the particular field. In 1993, the Supreme Court decided Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., and the court announced a new standard of admissibility for scientific evidence. This chapter illustrates how the Daubert standard has been applied to data analyses in US courts and its implication for Big Data as related cases become more frequent in the courts. Significantly, technological changes that make Big Data possible threaten to change the basis of current statistical reasoning and the basis upon which courts make decisions.

Keywords: Daubert; Frye; Admissibility; Internet of Things; Bayesian statistical analysis (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2019
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

There are no downloads for this item, see the EconPapers FAQ for hints about obtaining it.

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:pal:paiecp:978-3-030-31780-5_4

Ordering information: This item can be ordered from
http://www.palgrave.com/9783030317805

DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-31780-5_4

Access Statistics for this chapter

More chapters in Palgrave Advances in Economics of Innovation and Technology from Palgrave Macmillan
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().