Reiterate the importance of expert witness work
Describe the overall plan for this course
Outline some of the objectives for this course
In the court of law…
“Lay” (fact) witness = testify based (only) on personal knowledge of people, events, etc.
“Expert” (opinion) witness = can draw conclusions based on their examination of information
Who gets to be an expert?
According to Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 702:
Anyone with an established reputation in the subject area that is central to testimony
It helps to have an advanced degree in the subject area, but I don’t think that’s a requirement
Job description: prepare a report, which is a document that:
identifies the opinions you tend to express
outlines the data analyses supporting those opinions
Sometimes, that report is all you need to do.
Other times, you get invited to share ideas from that report in court
The voting rights of minorities are always under attack; this is especially true now
Census Bureau to release redistricting data this fall; states need this data to redraw legislative boundaries
Voter fraud lies fueled dozens of legal challenges, culminated in the riots on January 6, 2021, and inspires ongoing efforts to restrict access to the ballot
This mini-course will give you the skills and knowledge needed to perform racially polarized voting (henceforth referred to as ``RPV’’) analyses.
Such training will be particularly important as we enter the upcoming redistricting cycle in 2021, as proposals for the redrawing of district lines proliferate and need to be evaluated.
In preparation for this next redistricting cycle, this mini-course will explore
what RPV analysis is,
how such analysis is done, and
why it is relevant to expert witnesses, analysts, attorneys, community leaders, etc.
After this course, you should be able to
Use the R software package in general (and the desktop version of RStudio in particular) to conduct RPV tests
Disseminate results from RPV analyses in various formats (e.g., data visualizations, slide decks, reports, etc.)
Engstrom, Richard L., and Michael P. McDonald. 2011. “The political Scientist as Expert Witness.” PS: Political Science and Politics 44(2): 285-289.
Engstrom, Richard L., Daniel McCool, Jorge Chapa, and Gerald R. Webster. 2017. “Social Science Expert Witness Testimony in Voting Rights Cases.” National Political Science Review 17(1): 97-120