Reimagining Justice in Light of Neuroscience

Lawyers might have to rethink justice as groundbreaking advancements in brain science emerge over the next 50 years.

The progress of neuroscience and the parallel branch of neurotechnology are currently at the center of the study of law. With the advent of techniques such as functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), deep brain stimulation (DBS) and brain-computer interface (BCI), modern neurosciences are now able not only to detect mental states but also illustrate how interactions with the social environment bring about neurobiological changes that meaningfully impact the behavior.

As we lawyers gain knowledge of these new insights into the human brain, we are realizing the need to reconsider traditional legal paradigms, many of which are at odds with empirical evidence on human cognition and behavior. At the same, we bear the responsibility to ensure that scientific and technological developments remain tethered to the highest ethical and human rights standards. Indeed, inadequate regulation of neuro-technological progress exposes the field to possible misuses in social and normative contexts. Consider a scenario where neuroscience progresses to the point of manipulating the brain to induce positive personality changes in people with an alleged tendency for antisocial conduct. At first glance, this may seem an attractive prospect under the guise of prevention. However, it undeniably jeopardizes a multitude of moral and legal rights. In such a scenario, lawyers would have to advocate against these kinds of neuro-interventions to preserve the dignity, privacy, self-determination and other fundamental rights of the most vulnerable groups.

Against this backdrop, the key challenge for neurolaw in the upcoming years will be to find a balance between promoting legal innovation through science while safeguarding human rights and ensuring the ethical progression of neurotechnology. Consequently, future research should continue to facilitate collaborations between scientists and legal scholars, enabling them to weigh the ethical, legal, and social implications of neuroscientific advancements. These interdisciplinary exchanges will be necessary for ensuring prudent, just, and respectful uses of neurotechnology in legal settings.

Altogether, neuroscience-informed approaches to justice could offer unprecedented opportunities for reform. The hope is that these approaches will pave the way for policies that promote procedural fairness and foster less punitive and more effective ways for addressing wrongdoing, ultimately benefiting the most marginalized groups in our communities. When understood and employed appropriately, science in general, and specifically neuroscience, can serve as a powerful tool for legal reform and for reimagining justice through a different perspective. Therefore, as we step into the next 50 years, we must be ready and eager to embrace neuroscientific insights and seize the opportunity to redesign the justice system in accordance with our enhanced understanding of the human mind.