An upcoming change to a federal evidence rule has garnered support from those who say judges have not been consistently stringent in evaluating expert testimony post-Daubert, but critics say it’s a push for an unfair defense bar advantage billed as a crackdown on junk science at trial.

The update to Rule 702, set to go into effect officially on Dec. 1, has raised the issue of whether it’s a long overdue way to hold judges to an evidentiary standard they should have been following for decades or if it encourages them to cross over into the jurors’ domain.

Continue reading here.