There are many cases in which technical experts disagree on scientific facts that are relevant to important public decisions. The proposed science court is intended to deal with such issues. The basic mechanism of the scientific court is an adversarial hearing open to the public, governed by a disinterested referee, in which expert proponents of the opposing scientific positions argue their cases before a panel of scientist/judges. The judges will be established experts in areas adjacent to the dispute. The project will consist of a series of experimental science court cases on important policy issues. A discussion of the procedures focuses on issue selection, funding, selection of advocates, selection of judges and referees, transition from issue to factual questions, challenges, and adversarial procedures. Results from the proceedings will be statements of fact made by the case managers and not challenged by their opponents, as well as opinions of the judges regarding statements that were challenged. Evaluation measures and objectives are outlined, and future plans for the experiment are presented. 2 notes and a 15-item bibliography