Regulation Tracker / United States (state)
Opinion 705: Generative Artificial Intelligence
Professional Ethics Committee for the State Bar of Texas · Texas
last revised 2025-02-01last verified 2026-09-031 version
Ethics opinionIn forceCompetenceConfidentialityVerification dutySupervision
Unverified: we have not yet opened the official document at the linked address. The record is listed for completeness and excluded from search indexes until confirmed.
Opinion 705 from the Professional Ethics Committee for the State Bar of Texas, issued February 2025, addresses lawyers' use of generative AI under the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct. Lawyers must understand the tools they use, protect client confidentiality, verify all output before reliance, supervise staff, and charge only for time actually spent.
- Applies to
- lawyers, firms
- Effective
- 01 Feb 2025
- Current version
- February 2025 · 01 Feb 2025
- Last verified
- 03 Sept 2026
What the document requires
- Competence requires a reasonable understanding of the generative AI tool and its risks.
- Confidential client information must be protected; lawyers should review tool terms on data use.
- AI-generated legal research and drafting must be verified for accuracy.
- Lawyers may not bill clients for time not actually expended.
Version history
| Version | Date | What changed | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| February 2025current | 2025-02-01 | First version recorded. | official |
Sources
Cite this record
SafeLegalAI Legal AI Regulation Tracker, "Opinion 705: Generative Artificial Intelligence" (Professional Ethics Committee for the State Bar of Texas, February 2025, 2025-02-01), safelegalai.com/regulation/us-state/tx-professional-ethics-opinion-705 (accessed 2026-09-04). Data: CC BY 4.0.
More official documents in United States (state)
- Connecticut Judicial Branch, Committee on Artificial Intelligence in the Connecticut Legal System: Final Report · Connecticut Judicial Branch
- Connecticut Practice Book Section 4-9: Generative Artificial Intelligence Compliance · Connecticut Judicial Branch
- In re Amendments to Article V, Rule 1.1 of the Supreme Court Rules (Professional Conduct) and Adoption of Interim Generative AI Guidelines · RI Supreme Court
- Ohio Ethics Guide: Artificial Intelligence for Lawyers and Judicial Officers · Ohio Board of Professional Conduct
- 22 NYCRR Part 161 — Use of Artificial Intelligence Technology · NY Unified Court System
- In re Amendments to Florida Rule of General Practice and Judicial Administration 2.515 (generative AI), SC2026-0673 · Florida Supreme Court