AI presents both opportunity and threat to young lawyers
AI has moved from chatter to reality. The IBA's 2025 Legal Agenda ranks it as a 'critical issue,' and that tracks with what firms are seeing: more tasks once reserved for juniors are now handled by tools.
This isn't the end of the junior track. It's a reset. The work shifts, the skills shift, and the firms that respond with smart training and clear guardrails will keep their pipelines strong.
What the data shows
The IBA's AI Task Force found AI is still used mostly in back-office functions. Larger firms are pushing it closer to client-facing work. Most lawyers expect significant changes to structure, hiring and business models, with training flagged as a top priority.
As one Task Force lead put it, 'The paradigm is changing.' Document review, first drafts, and pattern checks are moving to AI. That changes how new lawyers build instincts.
What this means for junior lawyers
Historically, juniors learned by grinding through documents. That early contact with sources built judgment. If AI takes the first pass, firms must replace that learning loop with intentional training and supervised reps.
Law schools also have a job to do: teach core analysis and ethics, while ensuring graduates can work with AI responsibly. The goal is a lawyer who can think, check, and then use tools to speed the work without skipping the rigor.
Firms are split on AI access
Some firms ban juniors from using AI on core tasks so performance can be assessed cleanly. Later, those same firms expect associates to deploy AI responsibly for clients. It's a staged approach: build legal muscle first, then add the tech.
That makes sense. Due diligence might be tedious, but it's where you learn how deals are built. If AI shortens that path, mentors must actively close the gaps.
Risk, ethics, and the citation problem
Courts are seeing AI-generated citations slip into filings. That will get sanctions and headlines. The fix is straightforward: verify every source and keep a record of checks.
Benchmarks for responsible use are emerging. See the ABA's guidance on lawyers' use of generative AI for a crisp view of duties around competence, confidentiality and supervision.
Clients, pricing, and the billable hour
In-house teams want speed, quality and cost control. AI helps with the first two, and it forces a rethink of the third. Time-based billing gets awkward when a task drops from eight hours to one.
Expect more fixed fees, outcomes-based pricing, and explicit AI disclosures. Firms that pair AI with strong quality controls will win the trust-and the work.
Prompting is becoming a legal skill
'AI is only as good as the prompt given to AI. Drafting prompts is going to become a skill in itself, as important as legal drafting,' says Pranav Srivastava of the IBA Young Lawyers' Committee. That's not hype. Clear instructions produce better outputs and reduce rework.
Another constant: 'AI is only a tool.' The lawyer remains responsible for the result.
Why this is good news
AI doesn't erase legal judgment. It frees time for higher-value work and creates demand for advice on data, privacy and AI-focused regulation. As one partner noted, the incoming wave of tech regulation is business opportunity.
It may also help with burnout by trimming repetitive tasks and late-night busywork. Used well, that keeps people in the profession longer.
Practical playbook for legal teams
- Set policy: define approved tools, banned uses, data handling, and review requirements. Keep a short, living document.
- Train in two tracks: core legal analysis (sources, reasoning, citation) and tool use (prompts, verification, limits). Test both.
- Adopt a verify-first workflow: require source citations from AI, then check against the record. No unchecked AI text goes to a client or court.
- Pilot, then scale: start with internal memos, clause comparisons, and document summaries before client-facing use.
- Rethink pricing: offer AI-enabled fixed fees where quality is consistent and time is compressed.
- Log usage: keep a brief file note of what AI did, what you checked, and by whom.
- Guard confidentiality: use enterprise tools or no-data-retention modes; never paste sensitive client info into public systems.
Prompt patterns that work
- Frame the role and task: "You are a senior associate in M&A. Summarize these reps and warranties by category."
- Set constraints: jurisdiction, date range, sources allowed, and what to ignore.
- Require citations: "List sources with pincites and links. If unsure, say so."
- Force structure: bullets, headings, or a checklist so review is faster.
- Add a second pass: "Now critique the above for missing risks and conflicting authority."
Regulation is tightening
Expect stricter rules on model risk, transparency and sector-specific use. The EU AI Act is a useful reference point for how obligations may look across risk tiers.
For those building skills fast
If you want structured practice in prompts and tool workflows that match legal use cases, explore focused training resources.
The takeaway is simple. Keep the analytical core strong. Add AI fluency. Build systems that verify before you trust. The lawyers and firms that do this will not be replaced-they'll be the ones others call when AI raises new risks and new work.
Your membership also unlocks:
