Remedial Law, Legal and Judicial Ethics, with Practical Exercises › Legal and Judicial Ethics › Judicial Ethics (CJCA) › Standards of Ethical Conduct of Judges and Justices › Competence and Diligence (Canon VI)

i. Use of Artificial Intelligence (Secs. 5–6; See also AM 25-11-28-SC)

Use of Artificial Intelligence (Arts. 5–6, CJCA)

Concept

Artificial intelligence (AI) may assist a judge, but it does not replace judicial judgment. The governing provisions address both the judge’s continuing competence in using technology and the ethical limits on its use in judicial work. (Art. 5, CJCA)1 (Art. 6, CJCA)2

Governing provisions

Article 5 of the CJCA requires a judge to take reasonable steps to maintain and enhance professional competence. This includes keeping abreast of relevant legal developments and being proficient in technological tools that aid adjudicative and administrative functions. It also sets a specific limit on the use of AI tools. (Art. 5, CJCA)1

Article 6 of the CJCA requires the use of technology and AI to accord with the fundamental rights of court users and court personnel, as well as applicable ethical and professional standards. It directs judges to exercise care and prudence because these tools must not substitute for their own discernment and discretion. (Art. 6, CJCA)2

Requisites / Rules

  • A judge must take reasonable steps to improve the knowledge, skills, and values needed for the proper and efficient performance of judicial duties, and must keep abreast of relevant developments in law, including international law and norms. (Art. 5, CJCA)1
  • A judge must be proficient in technological tools that aid adjudicative and administrative functions. Proficiency supports the judge’s work; it does not transfer the performance of judicial duties to a tool. (Art. 5, CJCA)1 (Art. 6, CJCA)2
  • A judge may use AI tools only to research relevant legal authorities. Before citing an authority in a decision, the judge must verify the source. (Art. 5, CJCA)1
  • In using technology or AI, a judge must exercise care and prudence and remain mindful of the fundamental rights of court users and court personnel. The judge must retain personal discernment and discretion, especially when writing decisions and resolutions. (Art. 6, CJCA)2

Distinctions

The provisions distinguish technological proficiency from unrestricted AI use. A judge is expected to be proficient with tools that aid judicial and administrative functions, but the express permission to use AI is confined to research on relevant legal authorities, subject to source verification before citation in decisions. (Art. 5, CJCA)1

Key doctrines

AI is an aid, not a decision-maker. Even when a tool assists with permitted research, responsibility for evaluating legal authorities and exercising judicial discernment remains with the judge. This is particularly important in preparing decisions and resolutions, where technology must never replace the judge’s own discretion. (Art. 5, CJCA)1 (Art. 6, CJCA)2

Bar tip

Remember the sequence: AI research of relevant legal authorities only; verify sources before citing them; retain the judge’s own discernment and discretion in writing the decision or resolution. (Art. 5, CJCA)1 (Art. 6, CJCA)2

Authorities

  • Art. 5, CJCA
  • Art. 6, CJCA