AI Will Support Lawyers-Human Judgment Will Decide Justice
Technology has changed how work gets done across every industry. Law is no exception. The question isn't whether AI will affect legal practice. It's how we'll lead with judgment while using it well.
David Yosifon, a law professor at Santa Clara University, argues that AI won't replace lawyers. It will shift their attention. By offloading mechanical work to machines, lawyers can invest more time where it matters most: moral reasoning, strategy, and leadership in the justice system.
The core idea: AI as support, not substitute
In a forthcoming article-The Lawyer of the Future: Ethics and Identity in the Age of AI-co-authored with Michael Santoro and Isaac Nikkssarian J.D. '27, Yosifon makes a simple point. Use AI for the grind. Keep humans at the helm for judgment.
"With AI, lawyers will be liberated to think more creatively and spontaneously. They will be able to imagine institutional reforms that more effectively realize the visions of justice, equality, and liberty that have long been referenced in the rule of law, but haven't always benefitted from a lawyer's full attention," he says.
The article will appear in the American University Law Review. For broader context on scholarship in this area, see the American University Law Review.
We've seen this movie before
New tools don't end legal work-they change it. The printing press expanded access to legal texts. People could read statutes and cases on their own. But lawyers were still needed to interpret, argue, and lead.
AI is on the same path. It accelerates routine analysis but doesn't carry the weight of ethical judgment or client counsel.
Where AI actually helps
AI is useful wherever pattern recognition and speed beat manual labor. Think high-volume, low-judgment tasks. It's assistance, not authority.
- Document review at scale: flag issues, extract facts, track entities and timelines
- Case law triage: surface candidate authorities and summarize holdings
- Draft starters: memos, discovery requests, clauses, issue lists-always human-edited
- Hearing prep: consolidate facts, contrasts, and likely counterarguments
- Knowledge retrieval: pull prior work product and normalize formats
This frees time for the work that defines the profession.
What stays human
Ethical decisions live in relationships-lawyer and client, client and community, lawyer and policy. Consequences play out in real lives. That calls for judgment.
- Client counsel: goals, tradeoffs, and dignity
- Strategy: forum choices, timing, leverage, and risk
- Negotiation: reading people, earning trust, managing pressure
- Policy and reform: designing institutions that serve justice
As Yosifon puts it: "While AI may be able to replicate analytic frameworks used in moral reasoning and outline the consequences of a decision, the task of judgment ultimately falls to humans."
Practical steps for firms and legal teams
- Define use cases: limit AI to tasks where output can be checked quickly and safely
- Set review rules: nothing leaves the building without human verification
- Protect confidentiality: restrict data flow, control prompts, and log usage
- Choose tools with clear audit trails and enterprise security
- Train your team on both technique and ethics; publish internal guidance
- Track outcomes: time saved, error rates, client value-adjust as you learn
Ethics is the guardrail
AI use should align with professional duties: competence, confidentiality, candor, supervision, and fairness. Review the ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct and document how your AI policy meets them.
The takeaway
AI can speed the work. It cannot bear the burden of judgment. If lawyers keep their hands on the ethical wheel and use AI to clear the busywork, the profession doesn't shrink-it strengthens.
Build AI fluency without losing your standards
If you're formalizing AI skills across your practice, you can review curated options by role here: AI courses by job.
Your membership also unlocks:
