Regulation Tracker / United States (state)
Alaska Bar Association Ethics Opinion 2025-1: Generative Artificial Intelligence and the Practice of Law
Alaska Bar Association Ethics Committee · Alaska
last revised 2025-04-23last verified 2026-09-041 versioncountry page →
Ethics opinionIn forceCompetenceVerification dutyConfidentialityClient consentSupervision
map categories:Bar guidance on generative AIBilling for AI workClient data in AI toolsDuty to verify AI outputTechnological competenceSupervision of AI workClient consent and transparency
Alaska's generative-AI ethics opinion. Lawyers may use generative AI but must understand it, review all output, protect client confidences through closed systems or anonymisation, disclose the basis of any AI charge within a reasonable time of engagement, avoid billing for time not worked, and supervise staff using AI.
- Applies to
- lawyers, firms
- Effective
- See version history
- Current version
- 2025-1 · 23 Apr 2025
- Last verified
- 04 Sept 2026
- Official text
- alaskabar.org/wp-content/uploads/2025-1.pdf
What the document requires
- A lawyer may use generative AI but must first reasonably understand how it works, its limits and whether it safeguards client confidences
- All AI output must be carefully reviewed before use or submission (ARPC 1.1, 3.3)
- Before inputting client confidences the lawyer must review data-retention, data-sharing and self-learning policies; if unprotected, inputs must be anonymised
- AI costs may be billed only if the client's liability and the basis of computation are disclosed within a reasonable time after the representation begins (ARPC 1.5)
- Time saved by AI may not be billed as if worked manually; fees must remain reasonable and proportionate
- Lawyers must comply where a court requires disclosure of generative AI use
- Supervising lawyers must understand the technology well enough to oversee its use (ARPC 5.1, 5.3)
Version history
| Version | Date | What changed | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-1current | 2025-04-23 | Approved by the Ethics Committee 3 April 2025; adopted by the Board of Governors 23 April 2025 | official |
Sources
Cite this record
SafeLegalAI Legal AI Regulation Tracker, "Alaska Bar Association Ethics Opinion 2025-1: Generative Artificial Intelligence and the Practice of Law" (Alaska Bar Association Ethics Committee, 2025-1, 2025-04-23), safelegalai.com/regulation/us-state/us-ak-bar-ethics-opinion-2025-1 (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