AI's Role in the Courtroom
Embracing the Human Touch: AI's Role in the Courtroom
In the heart of Texas, a federal judge has laid down a new rule for his courtroom: AI-generated submissions are welcome, but only if a human has verified their accuracy. This decision by US District Judge Brantley Starr is a clear call for a human-AI collaboration in the legal field. He has mandated that lawyers must file certificates confirming their filings are either written or reviewed by humans.
"In this courtroom, we value the human intellect. No filing will be accepted if it's solely drafted by generative artificial intelligence like ChatGPT, Harvey.AI, or Google Bard. It must be checked for accuracy by a human being, using traditional legal databases or print reporters," Starr's new courtroom requirement reads.
This certification, applicable to each case, covers all filings - from quotations and citations to paraphrased assertions and legal analysis. Starr, a nominee in the US District Court for the Northern District of Texas, acknowledges the power of AI platforms in various legal applications. However, he firmly believes that legal briefing isn't one of them.
AI's Hallucinations: A Challenge to Legal Accuracy
AI platforms, while powerful, are currently prone to hallucinations and bias, according to Starr. He points out that these platforms can sometimes generate false quotes and citations. This standing order on AI was recently posted, as noted by legal expert Eugene Volokh.
In a surprising turn of events, New York-based lawyer Steven Schwartz admitted to using ChatGPT to assist in writing court filings. These filings cited six nonexistent cases, a fabrication of the AI tool. Schwartz and his associates now face potential penalties from Judge Kevin Castel of the US District Court for the Southern District of New York.
AI's Allegiance: A Matter of Principle
Starr's new standing order also discusses the potential biases in AI tools. He argues that while attorneys swear an oath to set aside personal prejudices and uphold the law, AI systems, being products of human programming, do not have to swear such an oath.
"AI systems hold no allegiance to any client, the rule of law, or the laws and Constitution of the United States. They act according to computer code rather than conviction, based on programming rather than principle," Starr wrote.
The Future of AI in Legal Briefings
Going forward, Starr's order states that the court will strike any filing from an attorney who fails to file a certificate attesting to the understanding of the court's specific requirements. This includes being held responsible under Rule 11 for the contents of any filing, regardless of whether AI drafted any part of it.
References:
Harness the Power of AI with Depo IQ
While the courtroom may have its reservations, the world of business is embracing AI with open arms. With Depo IQ, you can leverage the power of AI to streamline your operations, make data-driven decisions, and stay ahead of the competition. Sign up for a free Depo IQ account and start your AI journey!
