No Magic Wand: The Idealization of Science in Law

In No Magic Wand, Caudill and LaRue impart valuable wisdom for the beginner as well as the advanced legal scholar. Coverage ranges from the basics ― the current tests for scientific and technical evidence ― to the most sophisticated questions raised by commentators on forensic jurisprudence. The debate over how much courts should defer to experts is a key issue in the “science wars,” and the treatment of it in Chapter Three is trenchant and profound. This book is a must read for lawyers, professors, or judges who are seeking to come to grips with the scientific processes in the courtroom. — Ronald L. Carlson, Fuller E. Callaway Professor of Law, The University of Georgia

No Magic Wand is a tour-de-force that bridges the gap between jurisprudence and science studies. Caudill and LaRue successfully illustrate how law idealizes science and the problems this causes for the courts as well as for science. In this “brave new world” after the Supreme Court”s decision in Daubert, their solution―that courts view science as a pragmatic activity―will resonate both with scientists and lawyers. Every judge and lawyer grappling with scientific evidence, and every scientist testifying in court, should read this book. — Richard E. Redding, Villanova University School of Law

Caudill and LaRue have written an erudite, deeply considered, and highly readable account of the tension between the two cultures of law and science, the tendency of lawyers and judges to oscillate between credulity and dismissiveness when confronted by scientific testimony, and the need in short for legal professionals to acquire a more accurate understanding of the strengths and limitations of science in the legal process. — Richard A. Posner, U.S. Circuit Judge

Legal actors” understanding of how scientific knowledge is produced is a matter of immense and increasing importance in contemporary society. Caudill and LaRue make a significant contribution to this debate by drawing on science studies research as a prophylactic against the temptation to adopt idealized or “romantic,” as they call them, images of scientific activity. No Magic Wand demonstrates that bringing a science studies perspective to bear on legal problems leads, not to meaningless relativism, but to a profoundly pragmatic approach to assessing the value of knowledge claims that invoke the mantle of science. — Simon A. Cole, author of Suspect Identities: A History of Fingerprinting and Criminal Identification