Article IV — Relevance and Its Limits
Rule 402: General Admissibility of Relevant Evidence
What is General Admissibility of Relevant Evidence?
Rule 402 establishes the default rule: if evidence is relevant, it comes in; if it is irrelevant, it stays out. This is the starting presumption for all evidence questions.
Source: Fed. R. Evid. 402
Rule Text
Relevant evidence is admissible unless any of the following provides otherwise: the United States Constitution, a federal statute, the Federal Rules of Evidence, or other rules prescribed by the Supreme Court. Irrelevant evidence is not admissible.
Plain English Explanation
Rule 402 establishes the default rule: if evidence is relevant, it comes in; if it is irrelevant, it stays out. This is the starting presumption for all evidence questions.
However, 402 immediately qualifies this default by listing four sources that can override it: the Constitution (e.g., due process or confrontation rights), federal statutes, the Federal Rules of Evidence themselves (such as Rules 403-415, hearsay rules, privilege rules), and other Supreme Court rules. So relevant evidence is admissible unless one of these higher authorities says otherwise.
This rule works hand-in-hand with Rule 401. Together they create a two-step process: first determine if evidence is relevant (401), then check whether any rule or law excludes it despite its relevance (402). In practice, most evidence disputes are about whether some exclusionary rule applies, not about whether the evidence is relevant in the first place.
Key Points
- 1Relevant evidence is presumptively admissible
- 2Irrelevant evidence is always inadmissible — no exceptions
- 3Four sources can override the default: Constitution, federal statutes, FRE, and Supreme Court rules
- 4Rule 402 establishes the framework — relevance is necessary but not always sufficient for admissibility
Common Exam Issues
- Recognizing that 402 is usually a stepping stone, not the main issue — the real question is which exclusionary rule applies
- Understanding that state rules of evidence may differ and create different admissibility defaults
- Identifying when a constitutional provision (like the Confrontation Clause) overrides a rule of evidence
Landmark Cases
- Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
- Old Chief v. United States
Article IV — Relevance and Its Limits
This rule is part of Article IV — Relevance and Its Limits of the Federal Rules of Evidence.
Browse All FRE RulesMaster Evidence Law with AI-Powered Study Tools
20+ tools to help you study smarter. 3-day free trial, then $9.99/month.
Start Free Trial