Over the past decade Daubert has transformed judicial decisions involving questions of science and law. Daubert governs the federal courts and the 30 states that adopted Daubert in whole or in part.
Even in states that retain a Frye-type "general acceptance" standard, most state judges report that Daubert exerts a powerful influence on their admissibility decisions. Since Daubert, judges must decide for themselves whether proffered evidence is scientifically reliable; they may no longer defer to the scientific community. Daubert, the Supreme Court's response to growing concerns thatjurors were using 'junk science" to decide legal cases, contains the implicit assumption that forcing judges into uncharted terrain is better than exposing jurors to evidence they could never hope to understand
Available at: http://works.bepress.com/joelle-moreno/4/