Daubert Standard
The Daubert standard is the federal court framework used to keep junk science off the witness stand by requiring scientific testimony to meet strict validity criteria like testability and peer review.
The Daubert standard is a legal precedent used in United States federal courts to determine the admissibility of expert testimony regarding scientific evidence. Established in 1993, it requires judges to act as gatekeepers, ensuring that scientific reasoning is valid and methodology is reliable based on criteria like testability, peer review, error rates, and general acceptance within the relevant scientific community.
What this means in real life
In a product liability lawsuit, a plaintiff's engineer claims a car's braking system was defective. Before the jury hears this testimony, the judge holds a hearing to examine whether the engineer's testing methods are scientifically sound, whether other engineers agree with the approach, and whether the conclusions are based on reliable data—not just the engineer's opinion.
What it isn’t
It is not a rule that keeps all expert testimony out of court or requires absolute scientific certainty. Rather, it sets a reasonable threshold for reliability; judges still admit expert evidence regularly, but they must first verify it rests on solid scientific foundations, not speculation or fringe theories.
Commonly misused online
Social media often invokes 'Daubert' to dismiss any expert they disagree with as 'not meeting the standard,' when in fact courts apply it narrowly to specific testimony in litigation, not to all public claims or media appearances by experts.
Based on 1 reference source, including Wikipedia. Last verified July 12, 2026.