In recent years, the admission of neurobehavioral information as evidence in courtroom proceedings has seen a dramatic rise in legal systems around the world. This interactive panel will explore the current understanding regarding the effects of neuroscience on legal outcomes; identify methodological difficulties in measuring the impacts of neuroscience on legal decision-making; and propose improved approaches to overcome those methodological difficulties. The session will close with an open discussion of the strengths and weaknesses of approaches used by scholars to assess the impact of neuroscientific evidence on legal decisions and outcomes.
- Deborah Denno, JD, PhD
- Eyal Aharoni, PhD
- Colleen Berryessa, PhD
- Javier R. Mesa, JD, PhD
Attend
Neuroethics 2026
Building Bridges and Cultivating Community
Wednesday, April 15, 2026
This session was part of the Neuroethics 2026 conference organized by the INS and hosted by the Stanford Center for Biomedical Ethics at Tresidder Memorial Union.
Agenda
- Introduction / 5 minutes
- Presentations / 40 minutes
- Audience Q&A / 12 minutes
- Closing remarks / 3 minutes
Description
This interactive panel session aims to (1) explore the state of current understanding regarding the effects of neuroscience on legal outcomes, with an emphasis on criminal sentencing, (2) identify methodological difficulties in measuring the impacts of neuroscience on legal decision-making, and (3) propose improved approaches to overcome those methodological difficulties.
In recent years, the admission of neurobehavioral information as evidence in courtroom proceedings has seen a dramatic rise in legal systems across the world. Therefore, now is a critical time to understand the effects of such information on legal decision-makers, such as jurors, attorneys, and judges. Our first panelist, Dr. Deborah Denno, will present empirical research on the extent and contexts in which neuroscientific evidence is already being utilized within the American legal system. Our second panelist, Dr. Colleen Berryessa, will report on mixed-methods research highlighting the role of psychological process biases in criminal sentencing decisions and how diagnostic and neurobehavioral information affects perceptions of defendants. Our third panelist, Dr. Eyal Aharoni, will discuss how contextual and cognitive factors affect reception of neurobehavioral evidence and explore the potential uses and pitfalls of AI use in high-stakes legal decision-making. Finally, the fourth panelist and moderator, Dr. Javier Mesa, will discuss how neuroscientific information, specifically about temporally sensitive changes in cortical activity observed during drug withdrawal, can and should impact criminal sentencing of drug offenders.
The panel will close with an open discussion of the strengths and weaknesses of current approaches used by scholars to assess the impact of neuroscientific evidence on legal decisions followed by a Q & A session with the audience, facilitated by the moderator. The panel will speak directly to the conference’s interdisciplinary themes by promoting dialogue between scientists, ethicists, and legal professionals centered around the use and scope of neuroscientific information in legal decision-making. This proposed panel offers gender and racial diversity, as well as diversity in career stage of the participants. Because the panel will focus primarily on U.S. law and findings using samples of American participants, this session would have greatest impact at the Stanford, CA, conference site.
Speakers
Eyal Aharoni, PhD
Georgia State University
Dr. Aharoni is an Associate Professor of Psychology, Philosophy, and Neuroscience at Georgia State University in Atlanta. His research interests focus on moral, criminal, and legal judgement and decision-making and the contextual factors that shape such outcomes. He also investigates human perceptions of and collaboration with artificial intelligence systems.
Colleen Berryessa, PhD
Rutgers University
Colleen Berryessa is an Associate Professor at the Rutgers University School of Criminal Justice. Her research — employing both qualitative and quantitative methods — examines how psychological processes, perceptions, attitudes, and social contexts influence the criminal justice system, particularly in relation to courts, sentencing, and forms of punishment broadly defined.
Deborah Denno, JD, PhD
Arthur A. McGivney Professor of Law
Founding Director, Neuroscience and Law Center
Fordham Law School
Deborah W. Denno, Ph.D., J.D., is the Arthur A. McGivney Professor of Law and Founding Director of the Neuroscience and Law Center at Fordham Law School. The Neuroscience and Law Center provides evidence-based information to academics, lawyers, and the public about relevant advances in neuroscience to foster scholarship and the use of neuroscience in legal circles. Professor Denno also teaches criminal law, criminal procedure, and seminars on topics such as law and neuroscience.
Javier R. Mesa, JD, PhD
Neurotech Justice Accelerator, Mass General Brigham
Javier Mesa, Ph.D., J.D., is an incoming Research Fellow for the Neurotech Justice Accelerator at Mass General Brigham, and a licensed attorney in the state of Florida. He is interested in the intersections of neuroscience and law, including the use of brain science in legal proceedings, substance use policy, juvenile justice, mens rea, and brain injury. Javier aims to use his understanding of neuroscience and law to improve justice outcomes and foster collaboration between both disciplines.
Resources
Keywords: neurolaw, law, neuroscience, psychology, neuroethics
Recording
A recording of this session will be made available to registered attendees.