LawPulse

Illinois Supreme Court announces policy encouraging attorneys and others in the legal system to use artificial intelligence tools.

The Illinois Supreme Court has given attorneys the green light to use artificial intelligence (AI) tools. The Court left little doubt about its enthusiasm for the technology in a policy statement it issued in December, effective Jan. 1:

[AI use among] litigants, attorneys, judges, judicial clerks, research attorneys, and court staff providing similar support may be expected, should not be discouraged, and is authorized provided it complies with legal and ethical standards.

While the Court acknowledged AI raises concerns about “authenticity, accuracy, bias, and the integrity of court filings, proceedings, evidence, and decisions,” it stated these concerns are outweighed by AI’s potential to increase efficiency and access to justice. The Court also reasoned that AI use creates no new kind of misconduct, declaring that the Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct (IRPC) “apply fully to the use of AI technologies.”

Background

The policy was adopted based on recommendations from the Illinois Judicial Conference’s Task Force on Artificial Intelligence, formed in early 2024.

“We concluded that it would be shortsighted to discourage use of AI given its potential to benefit the legal profession,” says task force cochair Thomas Jakeway, trial court administrator for the 17th Judicial Court Circuit. “AI is everywhere, ingrained in our lives even in ways we often don’t readily acknowledge. We took deliberate care to avoid hindering technological advancements that could enhance client service and the administration of justice.”

While deliberating on the role AI could or should play in the legal system, Jakeway and fellow cochair, Associate Judge Jeffrey Goffinet of the First Judicial Circuit, said that, from the outset, task force members recognized the potential of AI.

“We were in no way naïve or blinded by the bells and whistles. AI is a powerful tool, and Illinois lawyers should be at the forefront of the appropriate applications of this tool,” Judge Goffinet says. “Could it be misused? Of course. Like any tool, AI could be misused. But that is true of digital documents and photographs, email, and the like. We trust our justice system to allow truth to emerge and abuses to be contained. That will be true of generative AI as well. The potential benefits to practicing lawyers outweigh the risks.”

Learning curve

The task force included members with various exposure to technology. (Another member was Daniel Linna, professor at Northwestern Pritzker School of Law and director of the university’s Law and Technology Initiatives. Linna was quoted about the task force in the Illinois Bar Journal’s April 2024 issue. See Joining the AI Revolution.)

Judge Goffinet says that despite his love of technology, grasping the implications of AI proved elusive.

“I had a good user level understanding of generative AI. Prior to being on the task force I have attended national conferences on the uses of AI and presented workshops on emerging technologies,” Judge Goffinet says. “Yet despite that, being on the task force deepened my understanding. I have described being on the task force as like trying to catch campfire smoke in your hands on a windy day. Every time I thought we had a strong grasp on generative AI, there would be another advancement.”

Jakeway says he has relied on AI for as long as computer spellchecking has been around. But during and since the work of the task force, he began using more advanced generative AI tools.

“Without spellcheck, I could scarcely function. My direct experience with generative AI was limited before working on this task force,” Jakeway says. “But today, through the insights and collaboration fostered by this task force, I’ve developed a deeper understanding and appreciation for generative AI. It now plays a significant role in my work, helping me brainstorm ideas, draft content, refine my writing, and, of course, ensure that my spelling is on point.”

Practical guidance

Perhaps the most significant aspect of the new policy is its reliance on the IRPC to guide attorneys on ethically using AI. The cochairs provided some advice for attorneys who are wading into this technology.

“Approach generative AI with both curiosity and caution,” Jakeway says. “Invest the time to understand its capabilities and limitations—knowledge is the foundation of both productive and ethical use.”

“Don’t ‘out kick’ your coverage. In other words, don’t use AI in ways that you do not fully understand,” Judge Goffinet warns. “If you aren’t sure where your confidential document goes if you upload it and ask for a summary, it might be a good idea to not do that until you are sure.”

“Lawyers should be bound to our ethics. Saying, ‘I did not know that AI could hallucinate,’ is not good enough,” he continues. “We need to not let AI make us lazy. Learn how the AI you are using operates and always review the product to make sure it is accurate. Experiment? Yes, but safely and intelligently.”

Pete Sherman is managing editor of the Illinois Bar Journal.
psherman@isba.org