Federal judges acknowledge court ruling errors tied to staffers’ AI use after Grassley inquiry
In a concerning revelation for the U.S. judicial system, two federal judges have admitted that their staff utilized artificial intelligence (AI) tools to draft court orders, resulting in significant errors. U.S. District Judge Julien Xavier Neals of New Jersey and U.S. District Judge Henry Wingate of Mississippi acknowledged these mistakes in letters responding to inquiries from Senator Chuck Grassley, the chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Senator Grassley described the court orders produced during the summer as “error-ridden,” prompting the judges to clarify that these rulings had bypassed the standard review processes typically employed in their chambers before being published.
Judge Neals reported that a law school intern had used OpenAI’s ChatGPT for legal research without authorization, violating both chamber policies and law school guidelines. He emphasized that such use of generative AI for drafting opinions or orders was strictly prohibited, and he has since implemented a written policy to ensure all staff are aware of these restrictions. Similarly, Judge Wingate revealed that a law clerk had used an AI tool called Perplexity to assist in drafting a decision, which led to the release of a flawed order. He acknowledged that this lapse in oversight was a mistake and assured that measures have been taken to prevent such occurrences in the future. The judges’ admissions underscore a growing concern over the integration of AI in legal processes, particularly regarding the accuracy and integrity of judicial decisions.
Senator Grassley commended both judges for their transparency and called for more robust policies to govern the use of AI in the judiciary. He stressed the importance of maintaining litigants’ rights and ensuring fair treatment under the law, warning against the risks of overreliance on technology that could compromise the integrity of the judicial system. This incident highlights a broader trend, as judges nationwide have increasingly scrutinized the use of AI by lawyers in court filings, leading to fines and sanctions for misuse. With the rapid advancement of AI technology, the judiciary faces the challenge of balancing efficiency gains with the necessity of upholding the principles of accuracy and fairness in legal proceedings.
Related articles:
– Link 1
– Link 2
Two
federal judges
admitted that members of their staff used artificial intelligence to prepare court orders over the summer that contained errors.
The admissions, which came from U.S. District Judge Julien Xavier Neals in New Jersey and U.S. District Judge Henry Wingate in Mississippi, came in response to an inquiry by Sen.
Chuck Grassley
, R-Iowa, who chairs the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Grassley described the recent court orders as “error-ridden.”
In letters released by Grassley’s office on Thursday, the judges said the rulings in the cases, which were not connected, did not go through their chambers’ usual review processes before they were released.
TRUMP ADMIN UNVEILS GROUNDBREAKING TOOL ‘SUPERCHARGING’ GOV’T EFFICIENCY TO ‘WIN THE RACE’ FOR AI DOMINANCE
The judges both said they have since adopted measures to improve how rulings are reviewed before they are posted.
Neals said in his letter that a June 30 draft decision in a securities lawsuit “was released in error – human error – and withdrawn as soon as it was brought to the attention of my chambers.”
The judge said a law school intern used
OpenAI’s ChatGPT
to perform legal research without authorization or disclosure that he also said was contrary to the chamber’s policy and relevant law school policy.
“My chamber’s policy prohibits the use of GenAI in the legal research for, or drafting of, opinions or orders,” Neals wrote. “In the past, my policy was communicated verbally to chamber’s staff, including interns. That is no longer the case. I now have a written unequivocal policy that applies to all law clerks and interns.”
FEDERAL JUDGE FINES, REPRIMANDS LAWYER WHO USED AI TO DRAFT COURT FILINGS
Wingate said in his letter that a law clerk used Perplexity “as a foundational drafting assistant to synthesize publicly available information on the docket,” adding that releasing the July 20 draft decision “was a lapse in human oversight.”
“This was a mistake. I have taken steps in my chambers to ensure this mistake will not happen again,” the judge wrote.
Wingate had removed and replaced the original order in the civil rights lawsuit, declining at the time to give an explanation but saying it contained “clerical errors.”
Grassley had requested that the judges explain whether AI was used in the decisions after lawyers in the respective cases raised concerns about factual inaccuracies and other serious errors.
APPARENT AI MISTAKES FORCE TWO JUDGES TO RETRACT SEPARATE RULINGS
“Honesty is always the best policy. I commend Judges Wingate and Neals for acknowledging their mistakes and I’m glad to hear they’re working to make sure this doesn’t happen again,” Grassley said in a statement.
“Each federal judge, and the judiciary as an institution, has an obligation to ensure the use of generative AI does not violate litigants’ rights or prevent fair treatment under the law,” the senator continued. “The judicial branch needs to develop more decisive, meaningful and permanent AI policies and guidelines. We can’t allow laziness, apathy or overreliance on artificial assistance to upend the Judiciary’s commitment to integrity and factual accuracy. As always, my oversight will continue.”
Lawyers have also faced scrutiny from judges across the country over accusations of AI misuse in court filings. In response, judges have issued fines or other sanctions in several cases over the past few years.
Reuters contributed to this report.
Eric
Eric is a seasoned journalist covering US Politics news.
