Judicial use of generative AI: Lessons learned
Who should read this?
- Judicial officers
- Court administrators
- IT departments
Why this report matters
Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) models are revolutionizing the way people in many fields do their work. To explore how judges in the U.S. are considering and using GenAI tools, the TRI/NCSC AI Policy Consortium on Law and Courts' Governance and Ethics Working Group embarked on an interview-based research project and summarized its key findings in "Judicial Use of Generative AI: Lessons Learned."
Background
In October and November 2025, 13 one-hour interviews were conducted with state and federal judges serving in 10 different states. Interviewees reflected a cross-section of the judiciary in the U.S., with participation from justices (including chiefs) of courts of last resort, judges of intermediate appellate courts, and trial judges. Judges in specialty courts like bankruptcy and probate were also interviewed, as well as judges of general jurisdiction courts. Interview questions focused on judicial officers' past, current, and contemplated use of GenAI tools. Judicial participation was anonymous and confidential.
Key findings
The interviews produced a range of insights about GenAI, including use cases, perceived risks and benefits, current support for and potential future impact of GenAI on judicial work.
Three main takeaways included:
- GenAI can support, but not supplant, the essential work of judges as human decision-makers.
Every judge who participated in the interviews was using GenAI in their own way. But there was unanimous consensus among the judges that, regardless of how they are using GenAI, judges must always remain "the deciders" who determine the ultimate outcome of any legal decision before them. - Early adopters are using GenAI in a variety of ways to save time, improve access to justice, and more.
The judges interviewed were identified as early adopters of GenAI, and they are using that technology in novel and innovative ways. The top benefit the judges identified was increased efficiency and using GenAI to help streamline certain tasks to save time. - Early adopters are mindful of a variety of known risks and tailor their usage to responsibly mitigate or eliminate those risks as they understand them.
Every judge who participated in the interviews stressed that it is critical that any judge who is considering using GenAI be aware of all of the potential risks of the technology in addition to the potential benefits.
Judicial benefits of GenAI
Improving efficiency
Using GenAI on repetitive, low-risk or administrative tasks, allowing judges more time and mental space for other aspects of judicial work.
Increasing access to justice
Exploring how GenAI might improve access to justice, such as user-friendly court chatbots and other interfaces that guide self-represented litigants in addressing their court service needs.
Improving communication with lawyers & the public
Helping judges effectively communicate, such as by creating summaries of rulings for the public, revising drafts to improve readability, and more.
Notable risks
Hallucinations
Instances of GenAI models making up fictitious information like cases or party names, also known as hallucinations, were top of mind.
Privacy & cybersecurity
Considerations regarding the types of documents/information to be uploaded and the types of models used, such as open, free models versus closed or private models.
Negative public perception
Understanding potential negative public perception of judicial use of
GenAI and considering policies and disclosures to aid transparency.
Deskilling & job displacement
Fear that over-reliance on GenAI could lead to a denigration of skills for lawyers, especially young lawyers and law students who now may not get the same
training experiences of more seasoned lawyers.
Consequences of use by self-represented litigants
Although there was excitement about GenAI increasing access to justice, there was also a concern about increases in the volume and length of filings by self-represented litigants using GenAI overwhelming the system.
TRI/NCSC AI Policy Consortium for Law & Courts
An intensive examination of the impact of technologies such as generative AI (GenAI), large language models, and other emerging, and yet-to-be developed tools.
Explore more
Is GenAI revolutionizing court filings?
This brief explores whether civil case filings, specifically contract cases, are increasing due to the rapid proliferation of GenAI tools.
Generative AI & the future of the courts
The Conference of State Court Administrators (COSCA) policy paper explores how courts can lead the way in responsible AI adoption, ethical oversight, and governance.
Key considerations for the use of GenAI tools in legal practice & courts
Understand foundational best practices for using GenAI tools, emphasizing that the rigor of
application for these practices – from tool qualification to ongoing oversight – that must be directly proportional to the intended use case and the inherent risk level associated with that use. These recommendations are grounded in principles derived from legal education, professional evaluation, ethical oversight, and practical implementation pathways.