One would hope so. My concern is that judges that are not scientifically trained might opt to accept only things that have undergone the peer review process. I fear that in some cases such a judge might rule out valid data.
If a case involves data that have not undergone peer review and/or are too complex for a non-scientist judge, perhaps the judge should set up a scientific review panel. Such panels do not need to involve the National Academy.
In cases involving competing scientific interpretations, the poor judge and jury sometimes don't know what to believe.
Sound advice. One would hope that this already is the practise.
Such panels do not need to involve the National Academy.
I don't live in the States. Why do you think this National Academy need not necessarily be involved? What is their role in the scientific field?