Non-use of A.I.

I do not use any form or manifestation of generative artificial intelligence in my practice as an attorney, and that extends to Minnesota Appellate Court Watch. I do not believe the A.I. drafting tools widely available at this time, specifically large language models, currently have any place in the practice of law. And because I don't see the value in it for my clients, I feel the same about my readers here.

I am not an A.I. denialist. There are promising uses of LLMs for tasks like document review. Attorneys I trust have talked about the efficacy of those systems, but I don't currently work cases which would require document review on that scale. And the list of lawyers who have used A.I. to disastrous effects is long and growing. These attorneys are not just being fined and disciplined; they're hurting their clients' cases. I believe this conduct is unethical, immoral, and flat-out bad, lazy lawyering.

I am not arrogant enough to deem it impossible that, someday, A.I. writing tools will be useful and reliable enough for regular use in the practice of law. But that day is quite clearly not today. And I don't see any reason to treat my work here any differently than I would in a practice setting.