ABSTRACT
The science advice the judiciary needs falls into two categories. In one, the court's scientific findings will affect the interests of the immediate parties and of almost no one else; in effect, their impact is limited to the single case. These findings are called "adjudicative facts". In the other category, the findings provide the factual basis for the way the court formulates a rule of law of general applicability. A better solution to the problems of unbridled and unhelpful partisanship may be to adapt the practice employed in voluntary arbitrations to the process of resolving adjudicative fact disputes calling for expert scientific information. Even more urgent than improving the way courts obtain scientific data on case-specific issues of adjudicative fact is the need in the sphere of legislative fact-finding. A major defect in the courts' self-help in this area is the tendency to use scientific studies, reports and data that are methodologically unfit for judicial consumption.
