Artificial intelligence and the Law: Don’t Hire Your Robot Lawyer yet
/Artificial intelligence and the Law: Don’t Hire Your Robot Lawyer yet
By: Lance J. LoRusso, Esq.
Artificial intelligence
It is the buzz word du jour that equally excites and strikes fear in the hearts of the technology savvy and ignorant alike. Like every other profession, law enforcement and the law are dealing with advances in AI technology and the struggles inherent in any new advances that involve computers. However, I don’t believe Skynet will be becoming “self-aware” anytime soon, that autonomous law enforcement robocops will be patrolling Times Square on New Year’s Eve 2025, or that a robot will be delivering my argument to the Arkansas Court of Appeals or the Eleventh Circuit Federal Court of Appeals in December. If this disappoints you, sorry to bounce your reality check. If this excites you, and confirms your beliefs, put your feet up, grab your abacus and follow with me as I show you neither the fears nor the excitement add up.
Emerging technology is all around us. Well, while that is true in 2024, it was also true in 1974. Advances in automotive and other technology, as well as the first real integrations of computers into the workplace, were gaining momentum in the ‘70s. As always, and seemingly perhaps forever despite the outstanding efforts of dedicated individuals in both professions, law enforcement and the law seem to lag behind.
For law enforcement, perhaps the reluctance to embrace new technology stems from the sheer number of law enforcement officers and the fact that any advances in technology require a rebalancing of resources, policy adaptations and training for an already overburdened workforce that for the large part has no control of its workload. As to the law, the concept of stare decisis is at play. This is the principle that law should build on prior decisions to make our jurisprudence predictable and form a solid foundation. This often causes innovations to occur with glacial speed under the watchful, raised eye of judges and lawyers reluctant to abandon time-honored traditions that have allowed the public to live their lives without surprises at least as the law is concerned.
AI in the law enforcement world will ultimately turn out to be an incredible tool. Assistance writing police reports to ensure completeness, analyzing thousands of pages of documents in a fraud investigation, performing a square foot analysis on a house based on GPS coordinates and a drone scan of rooms to locate probable hiding spaces, and eliminating or locating thousands of suspects in dense crowds are all potential uses of AI. Each will save thousands of man hours each year and are all now within the capability of AI in the hands of law enforcement. However, the data, outputs, analysis and reports produced by AI will always require the intervention of a human being. The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution does not allow a machine to swear out a search or arrest warrant, a machine cannot testify in a TPO hearing on behalf of the domestic violence victim, and we certainly do not want machines making use of force decisions. Even tasks as simple and routine as comforting a child or searching for a lost, disabled adult is better left to human LEOs who will hopefully use every available technology to maximize their success.
As to the law, just as Justice Sandra Day O’Connor expounded upon in her book, “The Majesty of the Law,” the art of the litigator and the judge and interpreting the law, making arguments, and committing to stare decisis are uniquely human talents. Novel legal arguments, challenges to established procedures that implicate constitutional rights, and the courage to stand in front of a jury and make an argument are all beyond the capability of machine learning.
As to claims that AI will lead to Armageddon, are they valid? Claims that AI can review body camera footage and determine which officers will, at some point, commit a policy violation raise my eyebrows and should raise yours, as well. In many ways, law enforcement officers are playing a role and they are also human. The statement made on social media when a fatigued, frustrated, or severely disappointed law enforcement officer reads a news story should no more determine the future of that officer than the random artifact errors found and acknowledged in AI should encourage abandonment of the entire technology. No one appears to be applying the same AI-driven “prospective analysis” to train engineers, airplane pilots or over-the-road truck drivers. Now, why is that…
If you say you’re never going to use AI, good luck. If you type on a mobile device, do any searches on the internet or even shop at the grocery store, AI is all around you. Like any new technology, it is best to learn about it, find out how you can benefit from it and determine what dangers are existent that may or may not resolve in the next short span of years.
Perhaps because I’ve been around a little while, I recall another advancement in law enforcement technology that raised eyebrows and had people clamoring on both sides of the issue. It was the transition from revolvers to semi-automatic handguns. The same can be said of the transition to patrol rifles. There were detractors, and still are, on both sides of these issues. But the changes are and were coming, and like most people who dig their heels and their heads in the sand, the refusal to embrace technology will relegate you to obsolescence.
In closing, I dictated this article using an AI-based program that I tasked with merely transcribing my words. No editorials, embellishments or additions necessary – just put my words onto paper. Very few sentences were dictated without requiring edits. For now, I believe we are all in no danger of being overrun by cyborgs or replaced by the mechanical redux of Officer Alex James Murphy. Stay safe.
Lance J. LoRusso is a former law enforcement officer and attorney practicing in Atlanta, Georgia. He represents law enforcement officers throughout the state in officer-involved shootings, discipline hearings, POST matters, FLSA claims and following traffic collisions. The profits from his books, When Cops Kill: the aftermath of a critical incident, Peacemaking, and Blue News support law enforcement charities. His books are available on www.lancelorussobooks and Amazon.
