Artificial Intelligence (AI) is transforming industries worldwide, from government and healthcare to finance. Even in everyday life, one would be hard-pressed to find someone who hasn’t tried ChatGPT or summoned Alexa or Siri for assistance.
Despite its potential to streamline processes and enhance efficiency, Michigan courts lag behind, often slow or completely resistant in adopting AI technology.
Given the endlessly-growing backlog of cases, the increasing complexity of legal proceedings, and the vast potential for human error, the judicial system could greatly benefit from AI integration.
So why aren’t more courts embracing this technology? And more importantly, why should they?
Why Are Courts Hesitant to Adopt AI?
Concerns About Bias and Fairness
AI systems learn from data, and if that data contains biases, the AI may unintentionally reinforce them. The legal system is built on principles of fairness and due process, so courts are understandably cautious about implementing technology that might perpetuate discrimination or lead to unjust outcomes.
But it begs the question, if the system and court are being ran fairly, shouldn’t the data be fair? Unfortunately, no because inherent bias is baked into the system. Consider charging and sentencing disparities between people of color and white individuals, such as the significant differences between crack and cocaine sentencing.
Judges intentionally or unintentionally miscounting OV guidelines could be a thing of the past, if done correctly.
Lack of Clear Regulations
Unlike industries where AI adoption is actively regulated and encouraged, the legal field has yet to establish clear guidelines on how AI should be used.
A few lawyers have taken heat after submitting briefs with blatant ChatGPT hallucinations – instances where the AI gets too creative and “fills in the blanks” case citations that do not exist.
Thad Guyer, the individual who has since become known as The ChatGPT Lawyer, faced sanctions for submitting a ChatGPT-generated brief without verifying citations.
On the other hand, the lack of regulation is allowing courts to use AI in other ways, such as the Florida judge who utilized a Virtual Reality (VR) headset with AI-simulated conditions for a crime scene recreation.
Whether judges loathe or embrace AI, without well-defined rules, courts open the door to potential legal challenges related to AI-assisted rulings or automated legal processes.
Resistance to Change
The legal system is deeply rooted in red tape and bureaucracy tradition, and many judges, attorneys, and court staff are sticks in the mud reluctant to change long-standing practices. This is common across many professions and with various technologies.
The idea of delegating tasks to AI can be met with skepticism, particularly when it comes to decision-making in sensitive legal matters or eliminating tedious tasks that create a person’s job security.
Privacy and Security Risks
Court cases involve highly sensitive information. The risk of AI systems being hacked or misused raises significant concerns about data privacy and security. Courts must ensure that any AI implementation meets stringent cybersecurity standards before adoption. However, AI could also help avoid human error, such as redacting documents where humans may otherwise forgotten.
The Cost of Implementation
While AI has the potential to reduce costs in the long run, implementing AI-powered legal tools requires significant upfront investment. Many courts and law firms, especially those with limited budgets, struggle to justify the expense without guaranteed returns. What they’re failing to understand, is that they will see savings across their entire workflow, gaining back time and efficiency.
Why Courts Should Embrace AI
Whether people realize it or not, AI is already being leveraged in multiple facets of work and life; predictive texting, Grammarly, Nest Thermostats… virtually any smart device.
Here are all the reasons why courts SHOULD embrace AI.
Reducing Case Backlogs
One of the biggest challenges courts face today is the overwhelming backlog of cases. AI can help by automating administrative tasks, analyzing case histories to predict case durations, and even assisting with legal research, allowing judges and lawyers to focus on more complex aspects of the law.
I’ve personally analyzed hundreds of cases for outcomes and sentencing recommendations; imagine how much time I could have saved if I trained a machine to do it for me?
Improving Efficiency
AI-powered transcription services can create real-time records of court proceedings, eliminating the questions that need for manual transcription and reducing delays. Similarly, AI chatbots can help litigants navigate procedural questions, reducing the burden on court clerks.
Additionally, court transcripts can be very costly, some costing thousands of dollars. AI could significantly reduce or eliminate that cost entirely. In a move that could revolutionize the industry, North Dakota is paving the way for AI Generated transcription.
Enhancing Legal Research
AI-driven legal research tools can quickly analyze vast amounts of legal data, identifying relevant cases, statutes, and precedents in a fraction of the time it would take a human researcher. This can lead to more informed decision-making and increased efficiency for legal professionals.
Minimizing Human Error
AI can help courts reduce clerical errors, such as incorrect filings, scheduling mistakes, and missing documentation. By automating routine tasks, courts can ensure greater accuracy and consistency in legal proceedings.
In my own experience, I have yet to see a human court reporter create a perfect set of transcripts; there is always at least one typo, misspelling, or something marked as “(inaudible).”
Expanding Access to Justice
Many individuals already struggle to navigate the legal system due to its complexity and high costs. AI can bridge this gap by offering automated legal assistance, helping individuals prepare legal documents, and guiding them through complex court procedures. It lowers the excessively high bar for entry, making the judicial process more accessible to those who might otherwise struggle to afford legal representation.
The Road Ahead
To successfully integrate AI into the courtroom, courts must take a balanced approach. This includes:
Developing Clear Guidelines: Policymakers need to establish ethical and regulatory frameworks to guide AI’s use in the legal system.
Investing in AI Education: Legal professionals should receive training on how AI works and how it can be used responsibly.
Implementing AI in Phases: Rather than a complete overhaul, courts can gradually introduce AI tools for administrative and research tasks before expanding into more complex areas.
Ensuring Transparency: AI systems used in courts must be transparent and explainable, allowing legal professionals to understand and challenge AI-generated recommendations when necessary.
Yes, Humans are still necessary (for now).
AI is not a replacement for human judgment in the courtroom, but it can be a powerful tool for improving efficiency, accuracy, and accessibility. As the legal landscape continues to evolve, courts that embrace AI will be better positioned to serve the public while upholding the principles of justice.
The question is no longer whether AI should be used in the courts; it’s how and when.
