Home > Journals > WMLR > Vol. 59 (2017-2018) > Iss. 3 (2018)
William & Mary Law Review
Abstract
Criticism of the Federal Rules of Evidence’s hearsay exceptions has intensified in recent years, with proposals ranging from abolishing the entire hearsay framework to narrowly amending specific exceptions. Both extremes risk undermining valuable doctrinal features or achieving too little reform. This article advances a middle-ground solution by expanding the “trustworthiness” proviso—currently part of the business and public records exceptions—to additional Rule 803 hearsay exceptions. Under this model, hearsay statements satisfying the categorical requirements of Rule 803 would remain presumptively admissible, while opponents could rebut admissibility by demonstrating circumstances that render the statements untrustworthy. This reform would rationalize hearsay doctrine by improving reliability, preserving predictability, and aligning Rule 803 with the residual exception in Rule 807. By offering systemic symmetry without discarding functional provisions, the proposal represents a pragmatic “just right” reform that modernizes hearsay law while avoiding the costs of sweeping doctrinal overhauls.