If you thought it was only corner-cutting lawyers and tech-savvy college students that were relying on artificial intelligence to do their work for them, this week may force you to reconsider. Reuters reports here that “[f]ederal judges in Mississippi and New Jersey have withdrawn written rulings in a pair of unrelated lawsuits after lawyers in the cases said they contained factual inaccuracies and other serious errors.” Although the judges have not revealed how the “inaccuracies” and “errors” came to be, the types of mistakes involved will be familiar to anyone who uses generative AI or even reads about it: phantom quotations from real cases; citations to testimony from non-existent declarants; recitations of allegations that were never made; and fundamentally flawed legal “interpretation.” Keep reading for more news, curated and written up by a real, live human being. Duke Law Journal in the federal government’s crosshairs. The United States Department of Education has launched an investigation based on reports that the Duke Law Journal engaged in unlawful discrimination when selecting its members. This story in the Washington Free Beacon asserts that the focus will be the journal’s “2024 decision to award extra points to applicants who mentioned race and gender in their personal statements.” This follow-up story reports that the journal sent memos to members of the law school’s affinity groups with secret advice about how to write effective statements. As a former editor of the Duke Law Journal (many years before the time period in question) I will decline to comment [...]
Faculty Coordinators
