Generative AI Is Reshaping Justice: From Drafting Verdicts to Assisting Judges — But Are the Results Reliable?

Artificial intelligence (AI) is actively transforming the legal world from helping judges write verdicts to offering crucial assistance in delivering justice.

Despite initial challenges, Generative AI (GenAI) is steadily being adopted in courts as this integration raises important questions about its future impact on the legal system and the very concept of justice.

The technology assists judges with their research, supports lawyers in preparing appeals, and helps parties involved in cases articulate their arguments in court.

'It's probably used more than people expect,' said Daniel Linna, Professor at the Northwestern Pritzker School of Law, who discussed GenAI's presence in the US legal system.

Linna added that while judges may not openly discuss it, individuals often approach him afterwards to share their experiences experimenting with the technology.

AI Gives Victim a Voice

In a notable case, generative AI allowed murder victim Chris Pelkey to appear in an Arizona courtroom – as a video avatar – during the sentencing of the man who fatally shot him in 2021 following a road rage incident.

'I believe in forgiveness,' a digital representation of Pelkey, created by his sister Stacey Wales, conveyed. The judge commended the avatar's authenticity, and Wales told AFP that she 'knew it would be powerful' and would 'humanise Chris in the eyes of the judge.

AI's Growing Role in US Courts

This ground-breaking AI testimony, a first, concluded the sentencing hearing, during which Wales and other family members spoke about their loss. Since then, the use of Generative AI in US legal cases has become increasingly common.

'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 north-eastern state of Maine. 'Overall, it's a positive development in jurisprudence.'

The AI Avatar: Creation and Impact

Pelkey's sister, Stacey Wales, and her husband, Tim, created the AI avatar. Stacey crafted the words 'spoken' by Pelkey, basing them on what she believed he would have said rather than using his actual past statements.

'You can't completely rely on it,' Schwartz cautioned, advising that cases presented by GenAI should always be reviewed for accuracy. He added, 'We are all aware of a horror story where AI comes up with mixed-up case things.'

The technology has been responsible for incorrect legal citations, improbable case precedents, and outright fabrications, per LiveMint. In early May, a federal judge in Los Angeles penalised two law firms with $31,100 (£23160.33) in fines and damages.

This was due to an error-filled petition drafted with the assistance of Generative AI, which the judge condemned as a 'collective debacle.' The technology is also used by some individuals who represent themselves in court, bypassing lawyers and often leading to legal inaccuracies.

Potential Caseload Increase

As Generative AI makes drafting legal complaints simpler and more affordable, courts, already struggling with heavy caseloads, might see a further increase, according to Shay Cleary of the National Center for State Courts. Cleary stressed that 'courts need to be prepared to handle that.'

Law professor Linna, however, believes Generative AI could be part of the solution, empowering more people to seek justice in a more efficient court system. 'We have a huge number of people who don't have access to legal services,' Linna stated. 'These tools can be transformative; of course, we need to be thoughtful about how we integrate them.'

Shaping Justice with Generative AI

Federal judges in the US capital have explicitly mentioned using ChatGPT in their written decisions, indicating its role in shaping their opinions. Linna stated, 'Judges need to be technologically up-to-date and trained in AI.'

The professor argued that GenAI assistants are capable of influencing case outcomes in a similar way to human law clerks. Facts or case law highlighted by GenAI could sway a judge's decision, and these might differ from what a legal clerk would have found.

However, according to Linna, if Generative AI fulfils its potential and excels at finding the most relevant information for judges, it could lead to well-supported rulings that are less likely to be overturned on appeal.