The arguments need to be based on actual law, and any cited reference cases need to be real.

There's been a lot of news stories about lawyers using AI, and then getting in trouble for citing hallucinated laws or cases. It doesn't matter if the AI response is "preferred" over the human one if it gets thrown out when put under the scrutiny of a real case.

▲

wilg 6 hours ago | parent [-]

Who's gonna determine that? A bunch of law professors?

	▲	voxl 5 hours ago \| parent [-]
		But did they? Or did they just go off what answer felt better? Did they put in any work to actually confirm the answer? Or did the busy law professors just click through and move on with their life?