Unconventional Methods for a Traditional Setting: The Use of Neurointerventions to Reduce Implicit Racial Bias in the Courtroom

Abstract

The presumption of innocence and the right to a fair trial lie at the core of the UnitedStates justice system. While existing rules and practices serve to uphold these principles,the administration of justice is significantly compromised by a covert but influentialfactor: namely, implicit racial biases. These biases can lead to automatic associationsbetween race and guilt, as well as impact the way in which judges and jurors interpretinformation throughout a trial. Despite the well-documented presence of implicit racialbiases, few steps have been taken to ameliorate the problem in the courtroom setting.This paper suggests that neurointerventions, such as computerized brain-training tasksand noninvasive brain stimulation techniques, have the potential to provide promisingmitigation strategies in the near future. Through analyzing the various ethical and legalconsiderations, this paper contends that the use of neurointerventions with judges wouldbe both justifiable and morally obligatory should safe and effective means becomeavailable. A similar argument is put forth for jurors, albeit in a more theoretical light dueto practical and logistical barriers. Given that implicit racial biases can seriouslyundermine the fairness of the justice system, this paper ultimately asserts thatunconventional de-biasing methods warrant legitimate attention and consideration.