Twenty-five years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc., that federal judges must conduct a scientific gatekeeping inquiry before admitting expert evidence.1 That ruling reshaped how judges evaluate scientific and expert evidence. In 2000, Federal Rule of Evidence 702 was revised to comport with the Daubert ruling and many state courts adopted either the Daubert rule or the Federal Rule 702.2 The Daubert ruling coincided with a surge in scientific research relevant to criminal cases, including the development of modem DNA testing that both exonerated hundreds of individuals and provided more accurate evidence of guilt. 3 At the same time, the scientific community