Federal Court Considers Rule to Regulate AI Use in Legal Submissions
Summary:
The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals is contemplating a rule that requires attorneys to disclose their use of artificial intelligence (AI) in drafting court submissions. This requires legal professionals and self-representing litigants to validate the accuracy of AI-generated content. Misrepresenting adherence could result in voided submissions and sanctions. The public can give feedback on the proposal until January 4. The rule aligns with a nationwide focus on the integration of emerging AI technology in courtrooms and draws on a similar regulation recently introduced in the Eastern District of Texas.
The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans is looking at a suggested rule requiring legal practitioners to disclose if they use artificial intelligence (AI) software to prepare briefs. This would necessitate the validation of AI-produced text through an independent human review, or the confirmation that the submissions were not AI-supported. On November 21, the court made public this proposal, appearing to be the premier regulation among the 13 federal appeals courts in the United States. This regulation is primarily aimed at overseeing the use of AI tools like OpenAI's ChatGPT in court representations.
Source: Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals
Notably, the proposed rule would bind both legal professionals and self-representing litigants to verify accuracy if an AI system was deployed in crafting a filing. This involves the validation of all citations and legal analysis. Legal representatives who submit false information about their compliance with this rule risk having their submissions deemed void and sanctions levied as per the proposed rule. The 5th Circuit is inviting public opinion on this suggestion until January 4.
The proposal's announcement coincides with a nationwide discourse among jurists regarding the rapid rise of generative AI programs like ChatGPT. This discussion revolves around the potential need for precautionary measures when incorporating such burgeoning technology into court proceedings. This discourse gained traction after two New York-based attorneys were penalized for submitting a document with six invented case references generated by ChatGPT.
Related: Biden's dismissal of Sam Altman implies mishandling of AI
In a parallel move in October, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas introduced a similar regulation. Effective from December 1, it mandates legal professionals utilizing AI systems to “assess and substantiate any computer-generated content.”
The court, in an accompanying statement on the regulatory change, noted that "often, the output from such applications can be erroneous, both fact-wise and from a legal perspective." It underscored that AI technology should never replace abstract thought and problem-solving skills unique to legal practitioners.
From the Magazine: Train AI models to be sold as NFTs, LLMs are termed as Large Lying Machines by AI Eye.
Published At
11/23/2023 8:50:02 AM
Disclaimer: Algoine does not endorse any content or product on this page. Readers should conduct their own research before taking any actions related to the asset, company, or any information in this article and assume full responsibility for their decisions. This article should not be considered as investment advice. Our news is prepared with AI support.
Do you suspect this content may be misleading, incomplete, or inappropriate in any way, requiring modification or removal?
We appreciate your report.