Lack of Scientific Expertise in US Courts Is a Cause of National Concern in the Post‐Chevron Era

Abstract Much of the economic growth of the U.S. in the past century is a result of scientific and technological advancements. In disregard for science, the US Supreme Court recently overruled the Chevron doctrine (known as the Loper decision) that mandated courts to defer to an administrative agency's reasonable interpretation of an ambiguous statute. This decision has empowered courts to exercise their subjective judgment even when the agency's interpretations involved an objective technical or scientific basis. Loper provides enormous power for (mostly) politically appointed Justices and judges, who typically have little or no scientific training. Data show that in the past 75 years, none of the Justices appointed to the Supreme Court bench had advanced science or engineering training. In this note, we point out some of the problems with the lack of scientific expertise in US courtrooms and recommend that the US Congress consider creative ideas to remedy this problem. Furthermore, we recommend more collaboration between US law schools and STEM programs to train scientifically literate 21st‐century legal practitioners.