Edited by Rob van Gestel, Professor of Theory and Methods of Regulation, Department of Private, Business & Labour Law (PBLL), Tilburg University, Jurgen de Poorter, Professor of Administrative Law, Department of Public Law and Governance,Tilburg University, the Netherlands and Edward Rubin, Distinguished University Professor of Law and Political Science, Vanderbilt University, USA

‘Judicial Policy Making, Empirical Data and Scientific Evidence offers invaluable insight into an unavoidable problem that courts everywhere face. Lawsuits routinely pose complex questions implicating data and scientific evidence, and they require judges without technical training to provide answers. The theoretically rich but grounded essays in this volume present a pathbreaking comparative legal perspective on how judges do and should grapple with this challenge. The volume’s indispensable guidance will strengthen judges’ capacities to forge public policy wisely, evenhandedly, and expertly.’

• Contents1 Introduction to Judicial Policy Making, Empirical Data andScientific Evidence 1Rob van Gestel, Jurgen de Poorter and Edward L. RubinPART I THE PROMISE OF EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE INJUDICIAL POLICY MAKING2 Why courts can only tell the truth with statistics 25Edward L. Rubin3 Discrimination by generalisation: about judicial use and abuseof statistics in anti-discrimination cases 69Juliana de Augustinis and Rob van Gestel4 Adopting the gold standard: field experimentation forevidence-based judicial lawmaking 100Arthur DyevrePART II THE PROBLEMS OF EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE INJUDICIAL POLICY MAKING5 The design of judicial deference and the use of scientificevidence in constitutional public interest litigation 114Niels Petersen6 Empirical evidence in equality law-making 136Alysia Blackham7 Unreliable science in the courtroom: shifting the courts’ focusfrom assessing the substance of an expert’s analysis to theprocess by which it was produced 169Wendy Wagner8 The misuse of AI in US sentencing 213Jed S. RakoffPART III BALANCING THE PROMISE AND THE PROBLEMS9 Macro effects in climate change mitigation cases: fourempirical challenges 227Elbert de Jong10 Climate science and the courts—science takers or sciencemakers? 246J.B. Ruhl11 Courts and expertise in environment dispute resolution – atale of two models 266Sharngan Aravindakshan and Dewy PistoraConclusion 291Rob van Gestel, Jurgen de Poorter and Edward L. RubinIndex 309

Edited by Rob van Gestel, Professor of Theory and Methods of Regulation, Department of Private, Business & Labour Law (PBLL), Tilburg University, Jurgen de Poorter, Professor of Administrative Law, Department of Public Law and Governance,Tilburg University, the Netherlands and Edward Rubin, Distinguished University Professor of Law and Political Science, Vanderbilt University, USA

‘Judicial Policy Making, Empirical Data and Scientific Evidence offers invaluable insight into an unavoidable problem that courts everywhere face. Lawsuits routinely pose complex questions implicating data and scientific evidence, and they require judges without technical training to provide answers. The theoretically rich but grounded essays in this volume present a pathbreaking comparative legal perspective on how judges do and should grapple with this challenge. The volume’s indispensable guidance will strengthen judges’ capacities to forge public policy wisely, evenhandedly, and expertly.’

• Contents1 Introduction to Judicial Policy Making, Empirical Data andScientific Evidence 1Rob van Gestel, Jurgen de Poorter and Edward L. RubinPART I THE PROMISE OF EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE INJUDICIAL POLICY MAKING2 Why courts can only tell the truth with statistics 25Edward L. Rubin3 Discrimination by generalisation: about judicial use and abuseof statistics in anti-discrimination cases 69Juliana de Augustinis and Rob van Gestel4 Adopting the gold standard: field experimentation forevidence-based judicial lawmaking 100Arthur DyevrePART II THE PROBLEMS OF EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE INJUDICIAL POLICY MAKING5 The design of judicial deference and the use of scientificevidence in constitutional public interest litigation 114Niels Petersen6 Empirical evidence in equality law-making 136Alysia Blackham7 Unreliable science in the courtroom: shifting the courts’ focusfrom assessing the substance of an expert’s analysis to theprocess by which it was produced 169Wendy Wagner8 The misuse of AI in US sentencing 213Jed S. RakoffPART III BALANCING THE PROMISE AND THE PROBLEMS9 Macro effects in climate change mitigation cases: fourempirical challenges 227Elbert de Jong10 Climate science and the courts—science takers or sciencemakers? 246J.B. Ruhl11 Courts and expertise in environment dispute resolution – atale of two models 266Sharngan Aravindakshan and Dewy PistoraConclusion 291Rob van Gestel, Jurgen de Poorter and Edward L. RubinIndex 309

Edited by Rob van Gestel, Professor of Theory and Methods of Regulation, Department of Private, Business & Labour Law (PBLL), Tilburg University, Jurgen de Poorter, Professor of Administrative Law, Department of Public Law and Governance,Tilburg University, the Netherlands and Edward Rubin, Distinguished University Professor of Law and Political Science, Vanderbilt University, USA

‘Judicial Policy Making, Empirical Data and Scientific Evidence offers invaluable insight into an unavoidable problem that courts everywhere face. Lawsuits routinely pose complex questions implicating data and scientific evidence, and they require judges without technical training to provide answers. The theoretically rich but grounded essays in this volume present a pathbreaking comparative legal perspective on how judges do and should grapple with this challenge. The volume’s indispensable guidance will strengthen judges’ capacities to forge public policy wisely, evenhandedly, and expertly.’

• Contents1 Introduction to Judicial Policy Making, Empirical Data andScientific Evidence 1Rob van Gestel, Jurgen de Poorter and Edward L. RubinPART I THE PROMISE OF EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE INJUDICIAL POLICY MAKING2 Why courts can only tell the truth with statistics 25Edward L. Rubin3 Discrimination by generalisation: about judicial use and abuseof statistics in anti-discrimination cases 69Juliana de Augustinis and Rob van Gestel4 Adopting the gold standard: field experimentation forevidence-based judicial lawmaking 100Arthur DyevrePART II THE PROBLEMS OF EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE INJUDICIAL POLICY MAKING5 The design of judicial deference and the use of scientificevidence in constitutional public interest litigation 114Niels Petersen6 Empirical evidence in equality law-making 136Alysia Blackham7 Unreliable science in the courtroom: shifting the courts’ focusfrom assessing the substance of an expert’s analysis to theprocess by which it was produced 169Wendy Wagner8 The misuse of AI in US sentencing 213Jed S. RakoffPART III BALANCING THE PROMISE AND THE PROBLEMS9 Macro effects in climate change mitigation cases: fourempirical challenges 227Elbert de Jong10 Climate science and the courts—science takers or sciencemakers? 246J.B. Ruhl11 Courts and expertise in environment dispute resolution – atale of two models 266Sharngan Aravindakshan and Dewy PistoraConclusion 291Rob van Gestel, Jurgen de Poorter and Edward L. RubinIndex 309