In what could be a defining moment for the use of AI, lawmakers in Brazil have passed a law that was drafted with the help of ChatGPT, an AI chatbot. The legislation prohibits the government from charging citizens for replacing stolen water meters. Councilman Ramiro Rosário revealed that he used ChatGPT to design the proposal, keeping the involvement of AI a secret. The move has sparked debates about the role of AI in legal and legislative processes.
The president of the Porto Alegre council, Hamilton Sossmeier, initially had concerns about Rosário’s methods, viewing it as a potentially dangerous precedent. However, upon further examination, he recognized that this could be a growing trend in the future. This case draws attention to the wider discussion surrounding the reliability and pitfalls of AI chatbots in legal matters.
Notably, earlier this year in New York, two attorneys, Steven Schwartz and Peter LoDuca, faced criticism for employing ChatGPT to support their cases by referencing non-existent legal precedents. The AI chatbot provided convincing yet fictitious answers, leading to the attorneys’ penalty of $5,000 and dismissal of the cases. This incident highlights the limitations and lack of reliability in AI chatbots, as they lack the understanding, judgment, and interpretive skills that human lawyers possess.
To address concerns regarding the use of AI in the legal field, Judge Brantley Starr of Texas implemented a new rule that requires lawyers appearing before him to file a declaration asserting that their submissions were not aided by AI. The Mandatory Certification Regarding Generative Artificial Intelligence was established after lawyer Steven Schwartz was found to have used AI writing tools in six of his cases. Similarly, in Massachusetts, a bill drafted by ChatGPT, with the help of Sen. Barry Finegold, seeks to regulate the use of artificial intelligence and proposes the watermarking of content generated by AI.
As AI increasingly takes center stage in various professions and industries, the legal field faces a moment of reckoning. It remains to be seen how the legal realm will adapt to and regulate the use of AI in order to maintain fairness, transparency, and the highest standards of legal practice.
As debates continue on the reliability and limitations of AI chatbots, it becomes evident that they cannot be a substitute for human lawyers. While AI can assist in certain aspects, the legal profession requires the unique qualities of human judgment, interpretation, and understanding of the legal framework. The discussion around the use of AI in the legal field will undoubtedly shape the future of the profession, as lawmakers and legal professionals strive to strike a balance between technological advancements and the timeless wisdom of human expertise.
