Under which standard is the admissibility of expert testimony determined in federal courts?

Under which standard is the admissibility of expert testimony determined in federal courts?

• A. The Daubert standard (reliability and relevance), as applied under FRE 702.
• B. The Frye standard governing general acceptance.
• C. Federal Rules require only helpfulness.
• D. Judicial intuition controls admissibility.

Answer: (A)

Federal courts rely on the Daubert standard under Rule 702 to decide whether expert testimony is admissible. The judge acts as a gatekeeper, ensuring the expert’s methods are reliable and that the testimony is relevant to the facts in issue. This standard replaced the older Frye general-acceptance test in federal practice, and it applies to scientific and other expert testimony (with non-scientific experts covered by the same gatekeeping principles, as later clarified). While the testimony must be helpful to the trier of fact, that helpfulness alone isn’t enough—the methods must be shown to be reliable and properly applied to the case. Judicial intuition has no place here; a reasoned assessment of the methodology governs admissibility.

Federal courts rely on the Daubert standard under Rule 702 to decide whether expert testimony is admissible. The judge acts as a gatekeeper, ensuring the expert’s methods are reliable and that the testimony is relevant to the facts in issue. This standard replaced the older Frye general-acceptance test in federal practice, and it applies to scientific and other expert testimony (with non-scientific experts covered by the same gatekeeping principles, as later clarified). While the testimony must be helpful to the trier of fact, that helpfulness alone isn’t enough—the methods must be shown to be reliable and properly applied to the case. Judicial intuition has no place here; a reasoned assessment of the methodology governs admissibility.