After <i>Daubert</i>: The Relevance and Reliability of Genetic Information

The United States Supreme Court decision in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., intended to replace the "austere" admissibility standard of Frye, directed federal judges to assess the scientific validity of the reasoning or methodology underlying expert testimony and its relevance to the facts at issue pursuant to the Federal Rules of Evidence. Daubert is particularly interesting with respect to the use of genetic information in the courtroom. While the most familiar use of such information is in the field of DNA forensics, genetic studies are increasingly cited in cases concerning family relationships and criminal responsibility.