Judges are becoming AI firewalls, setting guidelines for lawyers and litigants entering their courtrooms and reprimanding those who fail to vet their research or cite fake AI-generated cases.But judges are also navigating how to use the tech themselves.Why it matters: As attorney sanctions mount for irresponsible AI use, judges' chambers are at the center of the push and pull between innovation and caution. Some early adopters see AI use as a catalyst for justice — while other jurists remain staunchly skeptical."AI has the possibility to be an incredible value adder and force maximizer in the federal judiciary," says Amy Cyphert, a West Virginia University College of Law professor. "But it also has the potential to undermine public confidence in the judiciary at a time where it's already at a historic low." By the numbers: 60% of 112 judges surveyed by Northwestern researchers reported using at least one AI tool.
Just over 22% used AI tools weekly or daily.Cyphert's own research found judges worry about not only the risks of AI hallucinations but also the privacy and confidentiality implications.Yes, but: AI adoption is outpacing training, the judges reported in the survey. To fill those gaps, Magistrate Judge Maritza Braswell of the U.S. District Court of Colorado founded the Judicial AI Consortium (JAIC), alongside Judge Scott Schlegel of Louisiana's circuit court and U.S.
"Because the technology is moving very fast, I think the tendency tends to be to start from a place of fear," she says. So, "we've really created the space where we start from a place of knowledge."Friction point: U.S. District Judge Liam O'Grady of the Eastern District of Virginia tells Axios that before he retired in 2023, judges were fascinated by AI — but they also "had pretty grave doubts about its reliability."Lawyers, he says, had begun turning to the tools — and "it was clear that mistakes were being made right away."Case in point: Last month, a federal judge in Mississippi punished four lawyers and canceled a civil trial after both sides cited fake, AI-generated cases.
And it's not just lawyers who have faced heat.Damien Charlotin, a senior research fellow at HEC Paris, has identified more than 1,700 cases where generative AI hallucinated. On Thursday, a federal judge in Michigan accused the government of likely citing an AI-generated case in an…
Summary from source