After reading the passage, what are your thoughts on the statement to the question below?A few years ago, former U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced that the Justice Department would not renew its partnership with the National Commission on Forensic Science - a group of independent scientists, judges, defense attorneys, and law enforcement officials that had been advising the Department on ways to improve the reliability of forensics and on the use of scientific evidence in the criminal justice process. Sessions also announced that the Department is reconsidering its efforts to conduct reviews of forensic practices by the FBI, similar to the 2012 collaborative review of hair microscopy evidence. See: http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/sessions-says-justice-department-will-end-forensic-science-commission/ In light of the positive steps being made through collaboration, why do you think the Justice Department made this decision? Do you think such a decision will affect the rate of progress being made to bridge the gap between forensic methodologies and the scientific method? If so, how? If not, why not? The Justice Department chose not to renew a partnership with the National Commission on Forensic Science, instead moving forward with the creation of an internal sub-division dedicated to "study[ing] improvements to forensic analysis." The purpose of the committee is to have a dedicated advisor to the Justice Department who is familiar with the most recent and accepted forensic research, as well as to address the needs of overburdened crime labs. The decision to an internal review board for forensic advancements was a necessary move on the part of the Justice Department, with or without a partnership with the National Commission on Forensic Science. Considering the Supreme Court is the ultimate law of the land, the Court should have forensic advisors to ensure citizens' right to a fair trial through the quality of the evidence presented at trial. Despite the benefits of developing an internal counsel, and potentially reviewing the FBI's forensic practices, refusing to continue the Justice Department's partnership with the National Commission on Forensic Science may slow the rate of progress in bridging the gap between forensic methodologies and the scientific method. The National Commission on Forensic Science is an unbiased third-party group made up of extremely qualified individuals who do not report directly to the Justice Department, making their analysis on forensic progress the most legitimate. Not utilizing their knowledge could prove detrimental to efforts to improve the rate of flawed testimonies and evidence.