By Partner and President of Scribes – The American Society of Legal Writers, Michele Jochner

As Scribes – The American Society of Legal Writers celebrates its 75th anniversary, the legal profession finds itself at a critical crossroads in the evolution of legal writing. Although artificial intelligence is increasingly embedded in the tools lawyers use, our anniversary program reinforced a central takeaway: technology may assist the legal writing process, but it cannot replace the unique human touch of interpreting legal precedent and principles, exercising sound judgment and critical thinking, and applying the professional ethics standards that effective advocacy requires.

Our program, “Artificial Intelligence and the Future of Legal Writing,” brought together a panel of national experts with perspectives from the bench, private practice, arbitration, and legal education to consider how lawyers can use AI responsibly while preserving the qualities that define excellent legal writing.

How Should Lawyers Think About AI and Professional Judgment?

AI can assist lawyers with certain tasks, but professional judgment always remains the lawyer’s responsibility.

Panelists distinguished between the acceptable use of AI as a helpful tool and the abuse of AI when an attorney delegates substantive judgment to it. AI may help organize large volumes of information, identify material within documents, create timelines, check citations, or assist with other defined tasks. But determining the strength of an argument, applying law to unique facts, and deciding what belongs in a legal filing require independent human judgment.

This distinction matters in legal writing. Large language models identify patterns based on existing material. Lawyers, however, must interpret the law, analyze unique facts, draw meaningful analogies and distinctions, and develop arguments tailored to a specific matter.

Why Does Legal Expertise Become More Important as AI Improves?

The ability to evaluate and validate AI-generated information depends on the expertise of the person using it.

One of the panel’s most compelling observations was that these tools can reward expertise while also magnifying gaps in knowledge. An experienced lawyer may recognize when an AI-generated response misstates a holding, relies on outdated authority, or misses an important distinction. In contrast, someone without that foundation may accept the same response because it appears polished and authoritative.

Although AI can generate sophisticated language quickly, this does not mean that the legal analysis it offers is on-point and correct. Lawyers must still understand the authorities, evaluate the reasoning, verify the sources, and determine whether the analysis actually supports the client’s position.

What Does Responsible AI Use Require from Legal Writers? Responsible use requires lawyers to remain skeptical, verify responses, understand their tools, and protect confidential client information.

The panel repeatedly returned to the requirement of verification. Courts are regularly encountering AI-assisted filings containing nonexistent cases, false quotations, inaccurate statutory analysis, and the misgrounding of real authorities that are presented for propositions they do not support. In turn, courts are increasing the severity of sanctions for the misuse of AI, reminding practitioners that legal research and writing must always be balanced against human judgment.

The discussion also highlighted significant concerns with confidentiality. Lawyers must understand the systems they use, what happens to the information they enter, and what safeguards are in place. Panelists discussed the use of closed systems, the need for disclosure of AI use to the client and the client’s consent to that use, and the need to remain vigilant concerning the information that is uploaded.

Several practical principles emerged:

  • Know the tool: Understand what an AI system can and cannot reliably do.
  • Verify the sources: Never assume a citation, quotation, summary, or legal proposition is accurate.
  • Protect confidential information: Understand how the system handles information before entering client material.
  • Preserve independent judgment: AI can assist with appropriate tasks, but lawyers always remain responsible for the work.
  • Maintain substantive expertise: Lawyers have an ethical duty to gain the level of knowledge required to recognize when an answer is incomplete, outdated, or wrong.

How Should the Next Generation of Lawyers Learn to Work with AI?

Young lawyers need experience with AI, but they also need the foundational skills to question it.

The phrase “skilled skeptics” emerged during the panel as a useful way to describe this balance. Future lawyers should understand AI’s strengths and limitations while developing the ability to evaluate its output critically.

That starts with knowing what excellent legal writing looks like without the use of AI. Reading strong writing, developing substantive expertise, engaging directly with cases, and learning to analyze rather than merely paraphrase remain essential. Mentorship is also critical, as professional judgment develops through hands-on experience and collaboration.

Looking Ahead to the Future

Scribes’ 75th anniversary offered an opportunity to celebrate the organization’s history of promoting excellence in legal writing while considering what the next era of legal writing will demand.

For me, the enduring takeaway is that future legal writers will embrace innovation, while always being guided by human judgment and accountability. These fundamental ethical responsibilities cannot be abandoned to technology.