
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)
As AI tools and their adoption in legal practice continue to evolve rapidly, the accuracy and broader implications of predictions discussed here may shift significantly.
I suspect many lawyers use AI, but now they will be even more hesitant to admit it.
Full article not available — click below to read at the source.
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first.
Sign in to leave a comment.