•  
  •  
 

Abstract

Advancements in neuroscience call our intuitive notion of free will into question—and by implication, invite a reassessment of the United States criminal legal system and its reliance on radical personal agency. In the backdrop of the evolving landscape of neuroscience and neurolaw is an inquiry: how do we appropriately and ethically incorporate advancements of these fields into law and policy? This paper pulls that question to the forefront, advocating for a humanitarian-forward framework to guide the process. The framework emphasizes the Daubert standard, addresses the “G2i” problem, and includes a balancing test to ensure the protection of neurorights. The paper also provides an overview of the influence of belief in free will, personal agency, and neurolaw on the U.S. criminal legal system.

Share

COinS