You mean accept as evidence a dog's reaction which has been criticized and known to be directed by officers/handlers for illegal searches (by providing fake probable causes). A dog that you can not ask what they detected or even statistically test as we have seen in the article like you could do an ML model.

A whole field has been sprung on if and how ML inference could be used to make decisions, with lots of issues of racial profiling. And the judge and jury decided to accept a dog's reaction whose handler's new career was on the line.

I am not sure why one should trust the justice system these days.

P.S. A bunch of posts about Donziger and how UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention has stated to the U.S. he detention and imprisonment is against international law. I just find the sequence of articles ironic.