In a 2023 year-end report, U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts Jr. described the advantages and dangers of using AI in courts, calling AI the “major issue relevant to the whole federal court system.”
We’ve gathered articles on the news in articles from SHRM Online and other outlets.
The use of AI in the courts requires “caution and humility,” Roberts wrote. He said that AI could help make courts more accessible for those who may not have the resources to hire an attorney.
However, he seemed wary of a wholesale adoption of AI in courts, stating, “studies show a persistent public perception of a ‘human-AI fairness gap,’ reflecting the view that human adjudications, for all of their flaws, are fairer than whatever the machine spits out.”
Roberts wrote, “I predict that human judges will be around a while. But with equal confidence I predict that judicial work—particularly at the trial level—will be significantly affected by AI.”
(CNN)
Law professors report with both awe and angst that AI apparently can earn Bs on law school assignments, Roberts noted in his report. Legal research may soon be unimaginable without it, he added. AI obviously has great potential to dramatically increase access to key information for lawyers and nonlawyers alike. But just as obviously it risks invading privacy interests and dehumanizing the law, he cautioned.
(2023 Year-End Report on the Federal Judiciary)
A front-page article with the byline of veteran New York Times opinion writer Nicholas Kristof is the latest poisonous example of what I call the NGO “halo effect.” Headlined “The Silence That Mee...