From Neurons to Norms: What Came First?
The legal system has long relied on three principal concepts: individuals act with intent, their mental states are accessible through inference, and responsibility can be fairly assigned. Yet advances in neuroscience and artificial intelligence (AI) are actively testing the boundaries of these foundations. From the proposed use of functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) in lie detection to the ethical challenges of neuro-prosthetics and AI-assisted cognition, courts are confronted with evidence and arguments that challenge the very categories- agency, voluntariness, culpability- upon which modern legal systems are constructed, and that of which traditional doctrine is no longer designed to resolve.
This blog, Beyond a Reasonable Doubt, will explore the evolving role of neuroscience and technology in the legal field, branching into public policy. Key themes include:
Neuroscience in the courtroom: How tools such as fMRI are evaluated under evidentiary standards, as seen in Daubert and Frye, and the risks of overstating scientific findings to juries.
Agency and culpability in an era of augmentation: How neuro-prosthetics and AI integration may complicate mens rea, free will, and legal responsibility.
Constitutional implications: The balance between cognitive liberty, self-incrimination protections, and the state’s interest in crime prevention.
Ethical and policy dimensions: The broader impact of neurolaw on sentencing, rehabilitation, and equality before the law.
The aim is to rigorously interrogate how law, science, and philosophy converge in redefining the future of justice. In exploring these intersections, not only will we discover how the law responds to scientific innovation, but how such innovation may redefine the very basis of law’s most basic commitments. If the law is to remain intact in the age of the brain, it must grapple with what it means to determine truth, intent, and responsibility “beyond a reasonable doubt”.
Domenica Rehmann