Welcome to CO/AI

We slow AI down so you can speed up

Our mission is to make 1,000,000 people AI Literate

Aiming to break down complex subjects into digestible takeaways. The newsletter for people who don’t know where to start.

Today’s Letter:

AI Guidance From The Bench (4 Min)

In a trio of moves signaling a cautious embrace of AI within the legal profession, courts and bar associations begin to weigh in…

The Big Picture:

• New Jersey's Supreme Court has outlined preliminary guidelines focusing on lawyers' duties amidst AI integration, emphasizing the importance of accuracy, truthfulness, and the maintenance of client confidentiality.

• Florida's Bar Board of Governors has approved Ethics Advisory Opinion 24-1, providing guidelines for lawyers using generative AI, stressing informed consent and the need for confidentiality and competence.

• England and Wales' Judiciary has given judges the nod to use AI for drafting legal opinions, with a strong caveat against its use in legal research or analysis to prevent the dissemination of misleading information.

Why It Matters:

• Ethical Navigation: Each jurisdiction underscores the unchanged ethical duties of legal professionals, reflecting a commitment to uphold the values of accuracy, honesty, and client confidentiality in the digital age.

• Informed Consent and Confidentiality: Florida's specific mention of informed consent before using AI that might disclose confidential information marks a significant step in Attorney–client privilege in the context of emerging technology.

• Global Legal Landscape Shaping: The initiatives by these jurisdictions are among the first of their kind, setting precedents that could shape global legal standards for AI use, emphasizing a cautious but proactive approach to technological adoption.

Thinking Critically:

• Adaptation vs. Preservation: While these guidelines aim to balance innovation with ethical integrity, there's an ongoing debate about how the legal profession can adapt to rapidly evolving AI technologies without compromising the foundational principles of justice and equity.

• Technology's Pace: The rapid development of AI technologies may outstrip the capacity of legal frameworks to adapt, posing challenges in ensuring that guidelines remain relevant and effective in managing risks associated with AI.

• Accountability and Enforcement: Critics argue that the lack of clear enforcement mechanisms and the non-binding nature of some guidelines (like Florida's advisory opinions) may limit their effectiveness, highlighting the need for robust oversight and accountability structures.

  These developments reflect the legal profession's cautious optimism toward AI, recognizing its potential to revolutionize legal practice while diligently working to mitigate its risks.

Read Our Favorites: