CBA Record January-February 2026

THE LEGAL PROFESSION AND THE JUDICIARY IN THE AGE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE

transcripts, medical records, contracts, and discovery dumps. When prompting for such a summary, opt for specificity: “Summarize this 300‑page transcript into key issues, admissions, and impeachment points with page cites. Limit to 15 bullet points.” l AI also has been used successfully to generate plain language client summaries. Try generating such a summary and, if appropriate for clients who are nonnative English speakers, translating the content into another language—taking care to omit names and unique facts to protect confidentiality. Be mindful that with highly specialized or technical translations, checking the accuracy of the translation could be an issue if you’re not fluent in the subject language. l Lawyers have successfully turned lengthy agreements into crisp issue lists. However, the quality and accuracy of AI-generated issues depends on your verification skills. Use AI to frame issues that you may miss, not to finish them. ❍ For example: Lawyers have used AI in assisting with contracts by generating redlines against their playbooks, suggesting fall back provisions, and flagging deviations for attorney review. Legal Research l Never accept citations or quotes at face value. When using AI for legal research, it’s crucial to verify every citation with West law, Lexis, or Fastcase and a citator. There is no substitute for

reading the cases so you can avoid misquotes, hallucinations, or misattributions. Require AI to give you direct quotations with citations and links. Then, always take the time to double check the content against the official source and verify what you’ve cited. The Future AI is evolving rapidly. Staying open to new technologies while using your human touch and legal training have the potential to further facilitate your practice by saving you time, effort, and money. Attending AI technology confer ences, subscribing to legal technology journals, and attend ing CLE programs that address AI issues can be invaluable. The bottom line is that AI will not replace your legal judg ment and analytical skills. AI will reward lawyers who design clear processes, verify relentlessly, and protect client trust. Start small, measure, and standardize. Then scale what works—always keeping yourself in the loop to analyze and verify.

Justice Rena Marie Van Tine serves on the Illinois Appellate Court, First District; she is a member of the CBA Board of Managers and is Co-Chair of the Executive Committee for AI 2035: The Legal Profession and the Judiciary in the Age of Artificial Intelligence.

AI Guardrails in Law Schools

I f tomorrow's lawyers graduate without understanding how AI works, the pro fession will struggle to adapt respon sibly. This is particularly important when recognizing that law students are likely to be more proficient in the use of AI tools than seasoned lawyers. Here’s how some Illinois law schools are leading the way to address this issue: l The University of Chicago Law School has integrated AI into its first-year legal research and writing curriculum. Stu dents now use AI tools in the second semester—but only after mastering tra ditional research methods in the first. The law school has also launched an AI lab where students can design and build AI tools for legal services delivery. l Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law offers new courses such as “Arti ficial Intelligence and Legal Reasoning,” which teaches students to deconstruct

legal reasoning and engineer AI applica tions. l Chicago-Kent College of Law offers a JD Certificate in Legal Innovation and Technology, which includes coursework in AI and law. Students in the program engage with both the practical applica tions of AI and the ethical implications of its use. l The University of Illinois College of Law offers similar courses to that of Chicago Kent and has developed faculty guid ance on teaching AI effectively. These programs share a common phi losophy: AI literacy is not optional, and students must use AI to enhance—not replace—“thinking like a lawyer.” Stu dents must learn how to test AI's accu racy, recognize when human judgment must take over, and understand the ethi cal constraints that govern its use. Assign ments that pair AI-generated analysis with

traditional research methods teach critical thinking by exposing AI’s limitations. Most law schools across the country have also established clear policies govern ing AI use, and more should follow suit. These policies, which generally mirror plagiarism standards, specify when AI is permitted, when disclosure is required, and how violations will be handled. — By Joel Bruckman

CBA RECORD 19