Generative AI seems to have made its way into courtrooms with judges using the technology for research, and lawyers making use of it for appeals. Parties involved in cases have also used GenAI to help express themselves in courts. This has raised concerns over how AI is going to influence the legal system, and the course of justice itself.
“It’s probably used more than people expect,” said Daniel Linna, a professor at the Northwestern Pritzker School of Law, about GenAI in the U.S. legal system. “Judges don’t necessarily raise their hand and talk about this to a whole room of judges, but I have people who come to me afterward and say they are experimenting with it.”
READ: Winford Wealth to uplift financial advisors with AI-driven solutions (January 9, 2025)
In one prominent case, an AI-generated avatar of murder victim Chris Pelkey addressed an Arizona courtroom at the sentencing of the man convicted of shooting him dead in 2021 during a clash between motorists. “I believe in forgiveness,” said a digital proxy of Pelkey created by his sister, Stacey Wales. The judge was appreciative of this avatar, and said it “humanized” Pelkey.
The AI testimony helped end the sentencing hearing at which Wales, and others from the victim’s family spoke up about their loss. Ever since then, there have been many instances of AI being used in courtrooms.
“It is a helpful tool and it is time-saving, as long as the accuracy is confirmed,” said attorney Stephen Schwartz, who practices in the northeastern state of Maine. Schwartz described using ChatGPT as well as GenAI legal assistants such as LexisNexis Protege and CoCounsel from Thomson Reuters for researching case law and other tasks, and called it “a positive development in jurisprudence. However, he also cautioned against “completely relying” on AI.
“We are all aware of a horror story where AI comes up with mixed-up case things.”
There have been instances where AI was responsible for false legal citations, far-fetched case precedents, and flat-out fabrications. In early May, a federal judge in Los Angeles imposed $31,100 in fines and damages on two law firms for an error-riddled petition drafted with the help of GenAI.
An empirical study by the University of Wollongong, Australia, revealed the term “verification drift,” where initial caution erodes into misplaced trust in GenAI’s polished responses. This has raised concerns since verifying AI-generated content is mentally demanding and time-consuming — sometimes outweighing the efficiency gains GenAI promises over traditional legal research.
READ: Winford Wealth to uplift financial advisors with AI-driven solutions (January 9, 2025)
Nevertheless, AI continues to make an impact on the legal system. Law Professor Linna says that GenAI helps give more people the ability to seek justice in courts made more efficient. “We have a huge number of people who don’t have access to legal services,” Linna said. “These tools can be transformative; of course, we need to be thoughtful about how we integrate them.”
Many up-and-coming startups have released AI tools and platforms that reflect specific legal services such as Every.io which helps with setting up business entities and handles taxes, or Gale which handles immigration-related legal processes.