Our high-tech society is seeing an important convergence of two tradition-steeped disciplines, Law and Science. The differing principles of science and law developed over the centuries in response to their widely differeing objects of concern. Science, and its offspring technology, identifies knowledge through an open-ended search for expanded understanding, whose “truths” are always subject to revision. Law demands definite findings of fact at given points in time. The legal tradition of adversarial proceedings clashes with the cooperative ethic of science.

In today’s high-technology society the two approaches to truth are increasingly often forced to interact in legal disputes. The growing complexity of legal disputes and their frequent reliance on scientific findings has drawn scientists and lawyers into a public debate over the manner in which science shuld be reflected in legal proceedings. Such proceedings often attempt to resolve issues that scientists view as within their domains (such as whether breast implants cause autoimmune disease). Just as science has entered the courtroom, law is making its presence known in the laboratory. Scientists deal with a lot of laws governing intellectual property, access to research data, and conflicts of interest.

In short, the character of modern litigation coupled with the rapid growth of scientific knowledge and technology and their massive permeation into daily life, have brought law and science into the same arena, where differences in presuppositions and process are magnified. The fact-finding agendas of the two disciplines have begun to overlap, if not merge.

The resulting cognitive friction is disturbing to practitioners on both sides of the divide, and can be costly to society. Lawyers and scientists will never speak the same language, but it should be possible for each to develop a better understanding of the principles and methods of the other profession.

The Committee on Science, Technology and Law, which is co-chaired by Donald Kennedy and Richard A. Merrill, and includes 24 distinguished individuals drawn from the scientific, engineering, and legal communities, meets twice a year focusing its meetings around 4-5 discrete issues that are suggested by members, staff, and potential sponsors as topics for future projects. (See Committee Roster.) The Committee organizes, oversees, and in some cases, sponsors projects identified for in-depth exploration. Committee members agree to serve without pay providing an extraordinary example of pro bono service in the interest of improved public policy. An executive committee consisting of the co-chairs and five other Panel members provides ongoing guidance to the program director, who is supported by a program associate and fellows.

The CSTL has undertaken projects in five major areas: Science in Litigation: Post Daubert; Federal Information Policy/Access to Research Data; Science and National Security; Intellectual Property Rights; and Protection of Human Participants in Environmental Research.