Judges are voicing support for the use of generative artificial intelligence by lawyers as an early drafting tool, despite rising concerns surrounding the application of this nascent technology in court submissions. Among them is Chief Magistrate Judge Helen Adams of the US District Court for the Southern District of Iowa. During an online panel discussion, she noted the advantages of such technology saying, “We shouldn’t assume everything about AI is nefarious and not helpful.”
Her argument is that AI’s functionality in this context is akin to an associate or intern drafting the early stages of a brief, playing down fears associated with the emergence of AI services like ChatGPT. Workplace implementation of AI services such as these have begun to raise eyebrows in the legal field.
Judge Adams’ comments shed light on the debates taking place currently as the industry grapples with how and whether to respond to the advent of generative AI services in the courtroom. The ultimate need, however, is for attorneys using AI to exercise caution and continually verify the accuracy of the output offered by these AI tools.
Conversely, legal analytics and workflow tools contribute to the continuously developing portfolio of products at the forefront of transforming the legal workspace. Advances in technology are inextricably entwined with developments in the modern legal practice, from analysis to drafting and beyond.
For further information on this topic, you can find the full article here.