The rise of AI in law has provoked both optimism and caution in equal measure. Across the legal world, practitioners and clients alike are asking: will algorithms eventually render lawyers obsolete? Can technology truly deliver on the promise of wider access to justice or does it threaten to reduce legal reasoning and advocacy to mechanistic output?
The debate has been sharpened by voices such as Adam Unikowsky, who argued AI—when equipped with the right documents—can already handle oral argument in the highest courts with a competence equal to, if not greater than, most human advocates. Unikowsky’s experiment, in which he pitted a leading large language model (‘LLM’) against his own realworld US Supreme Court performance, is emblematic of a new con!dence which I suggest overestimates the capabilities of arti!cial intelligence.
Download full article here
