The use of social science generally, and geography specifically, in litigation in the United States has expanded since the 1970s. This paper examines the issues and nuances involved in geographical expertise, the role of experts, their evaluation by judges and attorneys (and other experts) and the interaction of attorneys, judges and the media. It also addresses the more fundamental issues of the problem of proof, the nature of geographic contributions and finally, whether or not the involvement in often tortuous legal proceedings has measurable impacts. I argue that courts are not well designed to legislate complex social issues.