National Commission on Forensic Science

National Commission on Forensic Science
Name	National Commission on Forensic Science
Formation	2013
Dissolution	2017
Type	Advisory body
Headquarters	Washington, D.C.
Parent organization	United States Department of Justice; Scientific Working Group

National Commission on Forensic Science The National Commission on Forensic Science was a United States federal advisory body formed to improve Forensic science practice, promote scientific standards, and advise the United States Department of Justice and Federal Bureau of Investigation on policy. It convened experts from federal agencies, academic institutions, state and local laboratories, and professional societies to address forensic issues linked to criminal adjudication involving courts such as the United States Supreme Court and legislative frameworks including the Daubert standard and the Innocence Project's reform efforts.

Background and Establishment

The Commission was established in 2013 under the direction of Attorney General Eric Holder in response to concerns raised by reports from bodies including the National Academy of Sciences (United States) and inquiries connected to high-profile cases like the West Memphis Three and investigations by the National Commission on the Causes and Prevention of Violence. Its creation followed critiques articulated in the 2009 report by the National Research Council (United States) and subsequent exchanges involving actors such as Barry Scheck, Peter Neufeld, and organizations like the American Bar Association and American Chemical Society calling for reform of forensic disciplines including latent fingerprint examination, hair microscopy, and bitemark analysis.

Mission and Objectives

The Commission’s mission was to enhance the reliability of forensic methods used in criminal justice, promote peer-reviewed standards akin to norms from the National Institute of Standards and Technology and the National Academies of Sciences, and advise policymakers such as members of the United States Congress and officials at the Department of Homeland Security. Objectives included developing best practices resonant with guidance from entities like the National Science Foundation, harmonizing accreditation consistent with American National Standards Institute models, and reducing wrongful convictions highlighted by groups like the Equal Justice Initiative.

Organizational Structure and Membership

Composed of representatives from federal agencies including the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Drug Enforcement Administration, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Commission also included academics from universities such as Johns Hopkins University, Harvard University, and University of California, Berkeley, practitioners from state labs including representatives from the California Department of Justice, and members of professional societies like the American Academy of Forensic Sciences and the International Association for Identification. Leadership included co-chairs appointed by the Attorney General, and subcommittees mirrored models used by the National Institutes of Health advisory panels and the Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues.

Key Activities and Publications

The Commission produced policies, recommendations, and discussion drafts addressing topics such as validation of forensic methods, reporting language for expert testimony, and standards for professional certification. Major outputs included draft memoranda on latent fingerprint terminology, documents on error rate reporting influenced by scholarship from David L. Faigman and Lyn Haber, and proposals related to accreditation reflecting standards from the International Organization for Standardization and the College of American Pathologists. The Commission hosted public meetings in venues frequented by groups like the Association of Prosecuting Attorneys and facilitated testimony from witnesses associated with the Innocence Project, the American Civil Liberties Union, and the FBI Laboratory.

Impact on Forensic Practice and Policy

The Commission’s recommendations informed policy debates in venues such as state legislatures in Texas, California, and New York, and influenced laboratory protocols adopted by agencies like the Metropolitan Police Department of the District of Columbia and the New York City Police Department. Its guidance contributed to revised courtroom practices under precedents related to the Frye standard and the Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. framework, and spurred enhancements in accreditation uptake among laboratories aligned with the American Society of Crime Laboratory Directors and certification boards like the American Board of Criminalistics. Academic and non-profit actors including scholars from George Washington University and organizations like the MacArthur Foundation cited the Commission in policy analyses addressing wrongful conviction reforms.

Controversies and Criticism

Critics from legal advocacy groups such as the Innocence Project and scholars affiliated with Rutgers University and University College London argued the Commission lacked sufficient independence from executive agencies, pointing to tensions with the Department of Justice and debates paralleling controversies involving the Office of the Inspector General (United States Department of Justice). Some forensic scientists and professional societies including factions within the American Academy of Forensic Sciences criticized specific recommendations on testimony standards and validation procedures, while defense advocates raised concerns about implementation comparable to disputes in cases examined by jurists like Justice Antonin Scalia and panels of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

Category:Forensic science in the United States