Since 2100 B.C., when Ur-Nammu developed the first extant law code in ancient Sumeria, legal professionals worldwide have made careers out of the tedious endeavor of poring over legal documents in the pursuit of justice. However, with the twenty-first century deemed the “software century”—an era of algorithmic automation—the legal field does not find itself immune to the threat of the incorporation of Artificial Intelligence (AI). The question naturally arises whether the integration of AI in law will be for the better or worse.

Benefits

AI is already being employed at a widespread level in the legal profession at every stage of a case. Specialized review systems equipped with generative AI have the ability to scan thousands of documents more quickly than the human eye and identify relevant information within them. This becomes a matter of seconds versus hours. 

During the legal research stage, AI platforms such as Ross Intelligence and Westlaw Edge have been developed to quickly sift through legal databases and extract relevant precedents and statutes for a specific case. A 2025 survey of legal professionals reports that their time spent on routine drafting has decreased by 40-60%, with 95% of those surveyed expecting Generative AI to be central to their work in the next five years.

Finally, in the closing stages of cases, firms are using risk-assessment algorithms to predict case outcomes and thereby guide strategy. Systems such as COMPAS, a US-based algorithm, score a defendant’s likelihood of reoffending to inform the sentence a judge hands them, reducing incarceration for low-risk offenders. 

In all the aforementioned cases, AI is benefiting law firms and legal professionals in one key way: optimization. 

Concerns

One of the first risks associated with increased AI automation in the legal field is the perpetuation of historical biases. A 2016 ProPublica report found that the same COMPAS software labeled Black defendants as high risk for reoffending at twice the rate as white defendants. 

A 2024 AI report released by Aporia found that 89% of machine learning engineers observed bias in their machine learning models’ output. AI systems must comply with anti-discrimination laws, as bias in such systems can lead to further lawsuits and legal disputes. Firms and professionals that use AI must regulate and monitor their systems for bias to guarantee due process. 

The next significant threat AI poses to the legal system is deepfakes. Judges are increasingly encountering confusion due to the increased use of AI in the courts, which raises concerns about the preservation of the integrity of evidence. Deepfakes make it difficult for courts to ascertain the authenticity and credibility of evidence, cumulatively clouding the decision-making processes in the courts.

Ultimately, completely bias-free and authentic generative AI is a misnomer and a concern for a field where justice must always be served impartially. With such risks of bias, AI compromises the legal field by removing essential accountability. When AI-automated systems produce information, they challenge professionals’ abilities to trace the reasoning behind it. Without vigilance, judges face the temptation of increased deference to AI-automated case proceedings and decisions, and if they err, it is unclear on whom the liability falls.

AI Employed

Overall, the ubiquity of generative AI models should not scare legal professionals but inspire them. AI may transform certain aspects of our legal system for the better. However, the law ultimately rests on the judgment of the human mind, which AI cannot replace. 

The law is not a formulaic route of justice; it is a human development produced through precedent and empathy. It is imperative that the legal field does not surrender its authority to AI but rather utilizes it as a means to enhance legal efficiency and access to justice in our technological world.

The challenge, then, is to ensure that AI remains a tool of optimization, not authority. Legal professionals must be increasingly taught how to scrutinize these technologies to ensure that they align with the foundational principles of justice. Through this, AI will not replace human judgment in the legal field but rather restore its effectiveness where it has often been delayed or denied.