AI Cannot Replace Lawyer's Judgment, Judge Says
A Supreme Court judge warned that artificial intelligence cannot substitute for the trained judgment of lawyers or judges, even as the technology offers practical benefits in legal work.
Justice Vikram Nath said Saturday that AI may save time on routine tasks and help draft documents, but the technology must remain a tool. It cannot invent law or replace the ethical responsibility lawyers carry as officers of the court.
"Technology may help draft a note, but it cannot be permitted to invent the law," Justice Nath said at a conference.
False Citations Undermine Legal Integrity
Justice Nath raised concerns about AI-generated material appearing in court filings, including in the Supreme Court itself. The problem: AI systems have cited authorities and legal precedents that do not exist.
False citations are not minor errors. They damage the credibility of legal submissions and the integrity of the judicial process, he said.
The misuse of AI in legal practice stems partly from careless implementation. Lawyers and firms using these tools without verification expose themselves to serious professional risks.
Finding Balance With Technology
Justice Nath rejected two extremes: blind adoption of AI without safeguards, or refusing to use the technology altogether.
Lawyers need to understand how AI works in legal contexts. Learn more about AI for Legal professionals, or explore an AI Learning Path for Paralegals to build competency with these tools responsibly.
The takeaway for legal professionals: AI handles routine work efficiently. Your judgment, ethics, and verification remain irreplaceable.
Your membership also unlocks:
