Skip to content

Justice-sector AI / country

United States

412 official records across 61 bodies. The rules this country's courts impose on litigants are on its regulation page; this page is what the justice system itself uses.

compiled by the Cognesio LLP editorial teammethodas of 2026-09-07v0.1.1coding CC BY 4.0JSON Hugging Face GitHub

Bodies

Records

  1. Website chatbot assistant for Clerk’s Office questions2026-08-28 · U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of South Carolina · Official announcement · now provides

    The U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of South Carolina announced that its website now provides a chatbot to assist the public with common Clerk’s Office questions and information. The chatbot is available from the court homepage.

  2. CourtHelp traffic services expansion2026-08-17 · Superior Court of Los Angeles County · Official announcement · expected to launch on August 17, 2026

    Los Angeles Superior Court expanded CourtHelp with traffic services for citation lookup, payments, payment plans, traffic school, extensions and hearing requests. The release describes CourtHelp as the court’s AI-driven virtual assistant for navigating services and information.

  3. Committee on Artificial Intelligence in the Connecticut Legal System final report2026-08-10 · Connecticut Judicial Branch · Internal policy · Final Report

    Connecticut’s Committee on Artificial Intelligence in the Connecticut Legal System reports that the Judicial Branch established an internal AI committee and review subcommittee. The report summarizes generative AI rulemaking and frames future AI initiatives around independence, fairness, transparency, accountability and human oversight.

  4. CourtHelp generative AI virtual assistant2026-03-30 · Superior Court of Los Angeles County · Official announcement · Launched on July 1, 2025

    The Los Angeles Superior Court announced that CourtHelp, launched July 1, 2025, is a generative AI virtual assistant on its website. It gives real-time guidance about court services, procedures and resources using court and Judicial Council information.

  5. Marshall self-help chatbot2026-02-10 · Virginia Judicial System Court Self-Help · Official announcement · Last updated on February 10, 2026

    The Virginia Judicial System Court Self-Help site publishes a page titled “Try our chatbot, Marshall!” for self-represented litigants. The page says Marshall was developed with Virginia Law Foundation funding and appears in the court self-help portal.

  6. Coco conversational online chatbot and virtual assistant2026-02-09 · Superior Court of California, County of Contra Costa · Official announcement · Available February 10, 2026

    Contra Costa Superior Court announced Coco, a conversational online chatbot and virtual assistant for public use on the court homepage. The release says Coco provides plain-language information about court services, forms and processes and is in beta.

  7. Administrative Order No. 26-04 disclosure of generative AI in court filings2026-01-15 · Eleventh Judicial Circuit of Florida · Internal policy · Administrative Order No. 26-04

    The Eleventh Judicial Circuit’s Administrative Order No. 26-04 requires attorneys and self-represented litigants to disclose generative AI use in filings and certify human review of factual assertions, legal authority and citations. The order takes effect immediately.

  8. Interim guidelines for use of Generative AI by judges and court personnel2025-11-12 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court and Trial Court · Internal policy · Interim guidelines

    The Mass.gov guidance URL for interim generative AI guidelines for Massachusetts judges and court personnel was identified. Automated access returned a forbidden page, and the single Wayback lookup did not expose readable policy text for verification.

  9. Generative Artificial Intelligence Guidelines for the judiciary2025-10-03 · Supreme Court of Louisiana Technology Commission · Internal policy · Generative Artificial Intelligence Guidelines

    The Louisiana Supreme Court Technology Commission’s October 3, 2025 guidelines address generative AI in the judiciary. The document warns against free LLM services, lists permissible uses such as summarization, research, drafting and accessibility, and stresses human oversight and judicial responsibility.

  10. Interim Policy on the Use of Artificial Intelligence2025-10 · New York State Unified Court System · Internal policy · Interim Policy

    The official NYCourts.gov PDF URL for the Unified Court System’s Interim Policy on the Use of Artificial Intelligence was identified, but direct fetching showed a JavaScript challenge and the single Wayback lookup did not expose readable text.

  11. Legal Technology Advisory Committee for generative AI guidance2025-09-15 · Colorado Judicial Branch · Official announcement · Launches Initiative

    The Colorado Judicial Branch announced Chief Justice Monica Márquez’s initiative to create a Legal Technology Advisory Committee. The committee is to develop guidance for attorneys, judicial officers, legal professionals and the public on generative AI and advanced technologies.

  12. Interim Policy on the Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence by Judicial Officers and Court Personnel2025-09-09 · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Internal policy · Interim Policy

    The official pacourts.us URL for a Supreme Court attachment titled as an interim policy for generative AI by judicial officers and court personnel was identified. Automated access returned Access Denied, and the single Wayback lookup did not expose the text.

  13. Rule 10.430 generative artificial intelligence use policies2025-09-01 · Judicial Council of California · Internal policy · effective September 1, 2025

    The Judicial Council of California rule page lists Rule 10.430, effective September 1, 2025. Courts that permit generative AI for staff or non-adjudicative judicial-officer tasks must adopt policies covering confidentiality, discrimination, verification, correction, and disclosure.

  14. Supreme Court of Virginia Rules for Generative AI Use2025-05-07 · Supreme Court of Virginia · Internal policy · Rules for Generative AI Use

    The official Virginia Courts URL for rules governing generative AI use in the judicial system was identified, but vacourts.gov returned a Cloudflare block and the single Wayback lookup did not expose text. Human review should confirm the latest amended policy.

  15. Administrative Order 2025-CM-017 establishing an artificial intelligence committee2025-02-27 · Kansas Supreme Court · Internal policy · Administrative Order

    The official kscourts.gov PDF URL for Administrative Order 2025-CM-017 was identified, but the site returned a Cloudflare block and the single Wayback lookup did not expose text. Lead results identify the order as creating a judicial branch artificial intelligence committee.

  16. ChatGPT references and judicial-use discussion in Ross v. United States2025-02-20 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Court discloses its own AI use · disclosed in opinion

    The D.C. Court of Appeals published Ross v. United States on February 20, 2025. The opinions discuss the majority and dissent using ChatGPT, and Judge Howard adds cautions about court AI use, security, privacy, reliability, and bias.

  17. Lex, Illinois Court Help’s chatbot2025-01-28 · State of Illinois Office of the Illinois Courts · Official announcement · now live

    The State of Illinois Office of the Illinois Courts announced that Lex, Illinois Court Help’s chatbot, is now live. Lex guides court users step by step to resources, follows late-2024 user testing and is available through ilcourthelp.gov.

  18. Illinois Supreme Court Policy on Artificial Intelligence2025-01-01 · Illinois Supreme Court · Internal policy · EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 2025

    The Illinois Supreme Court Policy on Artificial Intelligence authorizes AI use by litigants, attorneys, judges, judicial clerks, research attorneys and court staff if legal and ethical standards are met. It requires review of AI content and preserves judicial responsibility.

  19. Illinois Supreme Court AI Policy Judicial Reference Sheet2025-01-01 · Illinois Supreme Court · Internal policy · JUDICIAL REFERENCE SHEET

    The Illinois Supreme Court’s Judicial Reference Sheet accompanies its AI policy and gives judges guidance on generative AI, ethical oversight, competence, accuracy, confidentiality, hallucinations, deepfakes and extended reality. It reiterates that judges remain responsible for decisions.

  20. Interim guidance for Judiciary use of AI tools2025 · Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts · Internal policy · interim guidance

    The U.S. Courts 2025 annual report says the Administrative Office’s AI Task Force developed interim guidance for the Judiciary. The summary cautions against delegating core judicial functions to AI and recommends independent verification of AI-generated content.

  21. AI Guide for Judicial Officers2025 · Nevada Administrative Office of the Courts · Internal policy · AI Guide for Judicial Officers

    The official nvcourts.gov PDF URL for an AI Guide for Judicial Officers was identified, but the Nevada courts site returned a Cloudflare 403 and the single Wayback lookup did not expose readable text. The row records the official link only.

  22. Board for Judicial Administration AI Statement of Principles2025 · Washington State Board for Judicial Administration · Internal policy · Statement of Principles

    The official courts.wa.gov URL for the Board for Judicial Administration AI Statement of Principles was identified, but curl could not retrieve the host and the single Wayback lookup did not expose text. The item remains link-only for human verification.

  23. Administrative Order No. 2024-207 on use of generative AI in the judicial branch2024-10-30 · Arizona Supreme Court · Internal policy · Administrative Order No. 2024-207

    The official azcourts.gov URL for Administrative Order No. 2024-207 on generative AI use in the Arizona Judicial Branch was identified, but the host returned a Cloudflare block and the single Wayback lookup did not expose text.

  24. Judicial Council of Georgia Ad Hoc Committee on Artificial Intelligence and the Courts2024-10-22 · Supreme Court of Georgia · Official announcement · establishment

    The Supreme Court of Georgia announced on October 22, 2024 that Chief Justice Michael P. Boggs called for an ad hoc committee on AI and the courts. The committee is charged with assessing generative AI risks and benefits in courts.

  25. Interim Policy on the Use of GenAI by Judicial Officers and Court Personnel2024-10-21 · Delaware Supreme Court · Internal policy · go into effect on October 21, 2024

    The Delaware Supreme Court ordered an interim GenAI policy for judicial officers and court personnel on October 21, 2024. The policy covers approved tools, non-public information, user responsibility, training, legal compliance, and limits on delegating decisions.

  26. Generative AI and the Courts Workgroup Report and Recommendations2024-10 · Michigan Judicial Council · Pilot report · Workgroup Report and Recommendations

    The official Michigan Courts URL for the Generative AI and the Courts Workgroup report was identified, but courts.michigan.gov returned 403 and the single Wayback lookup did not expose text. Lead results describe recommendations for training, pilots and integration planning.

  27. Nevada Self-Help Center generative AI chatbot2024-09-15 · Nevada Supreme Court · Official announcement · launched in June 2024

    CiviLaw.Tech announced on September 15, 2024 that it developed self-help tools for the Nevada Supreme Court, including a generative AI chatbot launched in June 2024. The official Nevada Self-Help chatbot disclaimer says the chatbot is AI-powered.

  28. LLM ordinary-meaning research in United States v. Deleon2024-09-05 · U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Court discloses its own AI use · disclosed in concurrence

    The Eleventh Circuit published United States v. Deleon on September 5, 2024. Judge Newsom's concurrence states that he used ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini for research on the ordinary meaning of “physically restrained.”

  29. AI-generated court news reporters Daniel and Victoria2024-08-28 · Arizona Supreme Court · Official announcement · Introduces AI-Generated Court News Reporters

    The official azcourts.gov news-release URL for Arizona Supreme Court AI-generated court news reporters was identified, but direct fetching returned a Cloudflare block and the single Wayback lookup did not return text. The deployment remains link-only.

  30. LLM ordinary-meaning research in Snell v. United Specialty Insurance Co.2024-05-28 · U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Court discloses its own AI use · disclosed in concurrence

    The Eleventh Circuit published Snell v. United Specialty Insurance Co. on May 28, 2024. Judge Newsom's concurrence discusses asking ChatGPT and considering OpenAI, Google, and Anthropic large language models as possible aids for ordinary-meaning analysis.

  31. Administrative Order No. 2024-011 establishing an Artificial Intelligence Committee2024-03-27 · Superior Court of Arizona, Maricopa County · Internal policy · Administrative Order No. 2024-011

    Maricopa County Superior Court Administrative Order No. 2024-011 establishes an Artificial Intelligence Committee. The committee is the central clearinghouse for AI matters and may identify opportunities, evaluate and implement AI, manage litigation uses and recommend policies.

  32. JBAPPM Policy 1013 Artificial Intelligence Responsible Use Framework2024-02-01 · Connecticut Judicial Branch · Internal policy · Responsible AI Framework

    Connecticut Judicial Branch’s Responsible AI Framework applies to AI software, hardware, services and appliances used by employees, affiliates, contractors and vendors. It sets guardrails for ethical use, fairness, privacy, transparency, accountability, security, assessment and procurement.

  33. Administrative Order No. 2024-33 establishing the AI and Courts steering committee2024-01-24 · Arizona Supreme Court · Internal policy · establishing

    The Arizona Supreme Court issued Administrative Order No. 2024-33 on January 24, 2024. The order establishes a Steering Committee on Artificial Intelligence and the Courts to advise on implementation, evaluation, ethical use, guidelines, best practices, and authorized products.

  34. Ethics Opinion JI-155 on judicial technology competence and AI2023-10-27 · State Bar of Michigan Judicial Ethics Committee · Judicial-conduct opinion · issued

    The State Bar of Michigan Judicial Ethics Committee issued JI-155 on October 27, 2023. The opinion says judicial officers must maintain competence with advancing technology, including artificial intelligence, and discusses docket tools, transcription, risk assessment, and AI-related adjudication.

  35. Judges' use of artificial intelligence — JIC Advisory Opinion 2023-222023 · West Virginia Judicial Investigation Commission · Judicial-conduct opinion · Advisory Opinion

    The West Virginia Judiciary page for JIC Advisory Opinion 2023-22 lists the judicial ethics question of when a judge may use artificial intelligence at work. The page tags the item under Advisory Opinions and links the redacted PDF.

  36. SANDI artificial intelligence-based digital navigation assistant2022-07-25 · Eleventh Judicial Circuit of Florida · Official announcement · addition

    The Eleventh Judicial Circuit announced SANDI, an artificial intelligence-based digital navigation assistant for the Miami-Dade Courts website. SANDI answers English and Spanish requests, uses text-to-speech and voice commands, supports Family Court self-help and can connect users to paralegals.

  37. Veritone Illuminate2025 · U.S. Department of Justice — Antitrust Division · Use-case inventory entry · Deployed

    The DOJ 2025 inventory lists Veritone Illuminate for U.S. Department of Justice — Antitrust Division. The row states the stage as Deployed; it classifies the use case as Computer Vision for Law Enforcement and says it addresses Veritone Illuminate is a cloud-based application that provides machine translation and audio and…

  38. Stata (Forecasting, predictive analytics, data/statistical analysis)2025 · U.S. Department of Justice — Antitrust Division · Use-case inventory entry · Pre-deployment

    The DOJ 2025 inventory lists Stata (Forecasting, predictive analytics, data/statistical analysis) for U.S. Department of Justice — Antitrust Division. The row states the stage as Pre-deployment; it classifies the use case as Generative AI for Law Enforcement and says it addresses Forecasting market conditions using various data sources for economic…

  39. SAS (Forecasting, predictive analytics, data/statistical analysis)2025 · U.S. Department of Justice — Antitrust Division · Use-case inventory entry · Pre-deployment

    The DOJ 2025 inventory lists SAS (Forecasting, predictive analytics, data/statistical analysis) for U.S. Department of Justice — Antitrust Division. The row states the stage as Pre-deployment; it classifies the use case as Classical/Predictive Machine Learning for Law Enforcement and says it addresses Forecasting market conditions using various data sources for…

  40. R (Forecasting, predictive analytics, data/statistical analysis)2025 · U.S. Department of Justice — Antitrust Division · Use-case inventory entry · Pre-deployment

    The DOJ 2025 inventory lists R (Forecasting, predictive analytics, data/statistical analysis) for U.S. Department of Justice — Antitrust Division. The row states the stage as Pre-deployment; it classifies the use case as Generative AI for Law Enforcement and says it addresses Forecasting market conditions using various data sources for economic…