Justice Alito: "Just out of curiosity, do you think we should ask Claude to decide this case?"

This is a first-person reflection on AI's role in Supreme Court prediction and legal practice, prompted by a real exchange during oral arguments. The author maintains a largely observational, self-aware tone—acknowledging the decline of their own FantasySCOTUS project and reflecting candidly on AI's superior predictive capability. While the piece touches on concerns about lawyer hesitancy to disclose AI use, it frames this as a social observation rather than a prescriptive argument, and it credits Adam Unikowsky for transparency rather than attacking AI adoption.

Primary voices: author's own experience/project, supreme court oral argument transcript, academic or expert (Professor Scott Dodson)

• This article does not address potential ethical or professional responsibility implications of AI use in legal practice beyond the social hesitancy to disclose it.
• This article does not discuss whether Justice Alito's comment was entirely joking or contained a substantive critique of AI in the law.