In Illinois regulates the use of AI by judges and lawyers
The use of artificial intelligence in court is allowed even without disclosure of this fact, but subject to compliance with legal and ethical standards. At the same time, lawyers, judges and self-represented parties are responsible for the final product of their work.
On January 1, 2025, the Illinois Supreme Court Policy on Artificial Intelligence will come into effect.
The document states that the integration of AI into court operations is becoming more widespread, offering potential opportunities for increased efficiency and improved access to justice. However, it also raises critical questions about the authenticity, accuracy, bias, and integrity of court documents, evidence, and decisions. Understanding the capabilities and limitations of AI technologies is important for the judiciary.
Courts will be closely monitoring AI technologies that may threaten due process, equal protection, or access to justice. Unconfirmed or intentionally misleading content generated by AI that promotes bias, harms litigants, or impedes truth and decision-making will not be tolerated.
The use of AI by litigants, attorneys, judges, court reporters, legal advisors, and court staff should not be discouraged and is permitted, provided it complies with legal and ethical standards. Disclosure of the use of AI in court filings is not mandatory.
The Rules of Professional Conduct and the Code of Judicial Ethics are fully applicable to the use of AI technologies. Lawyers, judges, and self-represented parties are responsible for the final product of their work. All users should carefully review AI-generated content before submitting it in a court proceeding to ensure accuracy and compliance with legal and ethical obligations. Before using any technology, including generative AI applications, users should understand both the general capabilities of AI and the features of specific tools.
The Court recognizes the need to use AI in a safe manner, respecting privacy laws and regulations. AI programs should not jeopardize sensitive information such as confidential communications, personal data, protected health information, justice and public safety data, security-related information, or data that violates judicial ethics standards or undermines public confidence.
The Illinois Supreme Court promises to regularly review the policy as these technologies evolve, prioritizing public confidence in the judicial system and the administration of justice. Judges remain ultimately responsible for their decisions, regardless of technological advances.
The Delaware Supreme Court reportedly issued a similar policy for judges and other judicial officials in October, and other state and federal courts have created committees and task forces to study the impact of AI on the judiciary.
Popular news
Interaction
Protecting the rights of service members: The UNBA and the Military Ombudsman have agreed on cooperation
Servicemembers, reservists, conscripts during training exercises, members of local community volunteer units, and other individuals covered by the Law «On the Military Ombudsman» should have better access to professional legal assistance.
Rule of Law Roadmap
Reform without data and advocacy: what the Ministry of Justice’s launch has revealed
The Ministry of Justice hosted the first meeting of the working group on bar reform. But instead of professional preparation of legislative changes, we saw exactly what Armada Network Director Dale Armstrong had spoken about the day before in Kyiv: not reform, but a struggle for control over the agenda through a narrow circle of “stakeholders” who create an echo chamber of influence for themselves.
Rule of Law Roadmap
Advocacy, European integration and the limits of intervention: an American report presented in Kyiv
Following its presentation in Brussels, the report «The Ukrainian advocacy in the context of the rule of law and European integration» made its way to Kyiv. It highlighted critical issues both in understanding the very nature of the self-governing profession and in the emergence of a «shadow market» surrounding the Ukrainian advocacy.
Discussion
ETAIDF and MMC: where the system fails
The new system for assessing a person’s daily functioning and the practice of undergoing medical-legal examinations have already raised numerous questions — ranging from unclear procedures to difficulties in appealing decisions. These issues were examined by advocates during the roundtable discussion «Problematic issues of the ETAIDF and MMC», organized by the UNBA Committee on the protection of the rights of persons with disabilities and the All-Ukrainian public organization «Human rights union of persons with disabilities».
Rule of Law Roadmap
Access to the advocate profession: a subgroup has identified the direction of change
On Monday, March 16, a meeting was held of the subgroup «Access to the profession and training of advocates. Organizational forms of legal practice» of the Working Group on the implementation of the Rule of Law Roadmap.
Rule of Law Roadmap
Organization of advocacy: subgroup agrees on approaches to regulatory reform
On March 13, a meeting was held of the «Organization of the advocacy and self-government» subgroup of the Working Group on the implementation of the Rule of Law Roadmap regarding bar reform. The event was conducted via videoconference.
Guarantees of the practice of law
Ukraine has signed the Convention for the Protection of the Profession of Lawyer
Today, on 9 March, Ukraine's Permanent Representative to the Council of Europe Mykola Tochytskyi signed the Council of Europe Convention for the Protection of the Profession of Lawyer. This makes our country the 28th to sign this important international treaty.
European integration
The subgroup on European integration held its inaugural meeting
On March 5, the Ukrainian National Bar Association hosted a meeting of the subgroup of the Working Group on the implementation of the Roadmap on the rule of law in terms of reforming the advocacy sector, entitled «European integration, international practice and digitalization».
Publications
Volodymyr Matsko Extradition during wartime: when the risks outweigh the request
Volodymyr Matsko Extradition as a systemic form of rights violations
Victoria Yakusha, Law and Business The anti-corruption vertical cannot «take care» of the Bar as an institution, - acting head of the HQDCB
Censor.net Protecting advocates – protecting justice: addressing concerns about the new law
Ihor Kolesnykov A BRIEF SUMMARY REGARDING THE APPLICATION OF THE ORDER ON EXTENDED CONFISCATION IN LATVIA REGARDING FINANCIAL ASSETS OF…
Valentyn Gvozdiy WORKING IN A WAR ZONE
Lydia Izovitova Formula of perfection
Sergiy Vylkov Our judicial system is so built that courts do not trust advocates
