Often labeled as a primetarget for AI, the legal sector has seen predictions dating over a decade, with headlines including Armies of Expensive Lawyers, Replaced by Cheaper Software. Despite the widespread adoption of AI in law firms, 64% in 2021 (largely for billing purposes) – the transformative impact anticipated has not been realized. However, the emergence of generative AI with platforms such as ChatGPT, promises significant change.
Goldman Sachs recently estimated that up to 44% of legal work could be automated with generative AI. Further, research from Princeton, the University of Pennsylvania and New York University, concluded that ‘legal services’ is the industry most exposed to new AI technologies. But as is often the case with new technology, generative AI also introduces several challenges and ethical considerations.
Notably, in 2023, Judge P. Kevin Castel sanctioned lawyers Peter LoDuca and Steven Schwartz for submitting a legal brief, generated by ChatGPT, including citations of non-existent court cases. The incident underscored concerns about AI accuracy and the responsibilities of lawyers leveraging such technology.
Key ethical considerations in using generative AI in the legal sector
The integration of generative AI is already reshaping legal practices. Lawyers at large firms recognize the technology as a means to enhance productivity. For solo practitioners like Valdemar L. Washington, embracing AI is akin to having a strategic partner in practice. Washington’s experience with CoCounsel, a software utilizing ChatGPT technology, showcases its transformative potential. For Washington’s case against the City of Flint, the software was able to analyze and review over 400 pages of documents within minutes, identifying a critical gap in the defense’s case.
As generative AI gains momentum, questions of bias, transparency and accountability come to the forefront. A concern already prevalent among legal professionals, as highlighted in Thomas Reuters’ recent Future of Professionals report, with 30% of legal respondents expressing significant worries about data security and ethics.
Accuracy and transparency
As the legal profession relies on the integrity of information, arguably, the leading concern is accuracy and issues associated with AI hallucination. Software models’ inclination to confidently create information, referred to as AI hallucination, raises alarms and poses a risk of malpractice suits in a profession centered on finding and weighing facts.
The aforementioned case involving LoDuca and Schwartz is perhaps the best example. Judge Castel stated that if the attorneys had ‘come clean’ about Schwartz using ChatGPT to create the brief after opposing the motion to dismiss the suit, he may not have sanctioned them. Commenting on the incident, Castel wrote – “there is nothing inherently improper about using a reliable artificial intelligence tool for assistance. But existing rules impose a gatekeeping role on attorneys to ensure the accuracy of their filings.”
In addition, algorithmic bias also poses a critical concern. Models driven by training data may unintentionally perpetuate biases, resulting in unequal outcomes. The legal profession, rooted in principles of fairness and impartiality, must address and mitigate algorithmic biases to prevent discriminatory practices and uphold equity in legal decision-making. As Bennett Borden, Chief Data Scientist at DLA Piper puts it, AI success hinges on the availability of ample, relevant data.
Arguably, overcoming these key ethical concerns is in part what is driving significant interest in Lawtech, projected to reach $2.7 billion by 2026. Software like Casetext is designed specifically for legal professionals. Built with the legal context in mind, information on Casetext is curated, reviewed, and organized to meet the standards expected in legal proceedings.
Job displacement
Concerns about job displacement as a result of generative AI is not something limited to the legal sector; but prevailing reports suggest it could create increased capacity for higher-value, higher-touch work. While AI excels at automating routine tasks, it falls short in replacing the nuanced judgment and interpersonal skills integral to legal practice. While emphasis has been placed on the significance of acquiring new skills and adopting a technologically driven approach, predictions also cover the emergence of new career paths. Just one such example, the rise of legal tech consultants – a development that, as specialist legal headhunters, we are excited to witness.
Leaders in firms and in-house functions play a critical role in shaping this transition, emphasizing the importance of upskilling professionals to harness AI’s potential. The integration of AI is seen not as a replacement for humans but as a tool that, when used effectively, enhances the value and expertise of legal professionals, potentially bolstering the careers of paralegals and young professionals.
Increased legal affordability
In terms of positive ethical impacts, generative AI could act as a catalyst for legal affordability. Revolutionizing traditional processes and reducing billable hours for routine tasks, could enable law firms to provide more cost-effective service options. The democratization of legal access would allow more people to seek legal redress and promote a more equitable distribution of justice. As the Center for American Progress has written; “promoting equal, meaningful access to legal representation in the U.S. justice system is critical to ending poverty, combating discrimination, and creating opportunity.”
Though as the ease of generating legal complaints increases, there is also the possibility it will lead to an influx of frivolous lawsuits. Addressing such concerns may necessitate updates to existing laws to prevent potential abuses and maintain the integrity of the legal system.
Time savings for ethical deliberation
Generative AI could also help address mental health challenges prevalent in the legal industry. Lawyers often struggle with long hours and pressures to deliver error-free work. By automating routine tasks such as document review and case law analysis, AI liberates legal professionals from time-consuming processes, providing them with more opportunities for ethical deliberation and nuanced decision-making.
Moreover, generative AI could play a role in improving due diligence processes and ensuring legal compliance. By automating the analysis of extensive legal information and regulatory requirements, AI can aid legal professionals amid evolving regulations.
Future implications and legal standards
While AI integration continues, only 3% of law firms currently use generative AI, with another 2% planning its implementation, showing a cautious approach likely awaiting AI regulation. A staggering 93% of law firm respondents recognize the need for AI regulation. However, there’s substantial value in this waiting period.
Over half of professionals (52%) advocate for industry-level regulations overseeing AI’s professional ethics. A significant quarter believe governments should design and oversee these regulations. This prevailing sentiment presents a crucial opportunity for the legal sector to actively engage with AI. Understanding its capabilities and limitations allows shaping its application for the profession’s and society’s benefit. Moreover, this delay allows firms and in-house departments to strengthen their ethics programs, imperative for mitigating risks linked to AI usage.
If you’re a lawyer or attorney considering your future career, our legal recruitment specialists provide a complimentary candidate-first service. Reach out to our team today to discuss the market and explore opportunities with firms embracing a more technologically driven approach.
