ABA Journal: Legal Rebels

The last few weeks have brought some pretty scary headlines when it comes to artificial intelligence. OpenAI admitted to hacking into government databases in Australia, and that several of its AI agents went rogue and probed three U.S. government websites over the summer. Another AI agent tried to hack into a Canadian government website. And, of course, there was the really scary headline from a few weeks ago, when Anthropic researchers acknowledged that AI could kill us all by the end of the decade. Does AI need guardrails and, if so, how should those guardrails look and what can lawyers do to try to push AI toward a more beneficial outcome for humanity?

Have you been injured in a car accident? Or hurt on the job? Or had a bad reaction to some drug? If you’re a plaintiffs lawyer, chances are that you’ve uttered some variation of those words—either in a commercial or on a highway billboard. Then when calls come in, you have to evaluate them to see whether they’re worth taking on contingency. If they go forward, then there’s discovery, depositions, motion practice, investigations and a lot of other work to get a case ready for trial—even though most of the time, cases end up settling out of court. That’s been the traditional path for most plaintiffs lawyers.

Have you heard about artificial intelligence-native law firms? The potential time savings are astronomical and could maybe even upend the traditional billable hour. But the drawbacks are also real.

In the past few years, more and more states have been considering or implementing different pathways to the bar that involve hands-on work in real-world legal practices that is evaluated by bar examiners. How each state’s program works varies, but many involve law students or graduates working with supervision in legal deserts, helping to ease access-to-justice issues, as well.

Defined as the practice of using artificial intelligence tools to create software through verbal prompts and then having the AI write the underlying code based on those prompts, vibe coding has plenty of applications and implications for lawyers. Lawyers can create all sorts of programs and applications to help make them more productive. But of course, with any powerful technological tool, there are some risks and things you should be careful of.

Arbitration has emerged as a faster, more streamlined option for parties looking to resolve disputes. The emergence of generative artificial intelligence has supercharged arbitration even more.

Most lawyers probably have bad memories of high school physics and would rather get held in contempt of court than learn about quantum mechanics. They might change their tune when they learn about the potential and promise of quantum computing.

If you look at this year’s ABA Techshow advertising material, you could be forgiven for thinking that you were reading a comic book. Between the cartoon-style illustrations and the comic book-style captions and headings on the brochure and website, it’s clear what motif that the Techshow planners were going for was. Perhaps that’s appropriate, given how quickly generative artificial intelligence tools have established a foothold in the legal industry. Like a superhero—or perhaps more accurately, a superhero’s sidekick—AI has helped save the day for a lot of lawyers.

Let’s talk about every lawyer’s favorite subject: exams. It seems like every day, there’s another threshold that generative artificial intelligence crosses. First, it was able to take a bar exam and do reasonably well. Then it was able to ace it. Same with law school exams. Right now, AI would probably graduate at the top of its class, edit law review and land a six-figure associate’s job with an Am Law 50 firm. Now comes another milestone.

In 2025, we saw greater adoption of generative artificial intelligence tools across all areas of the legal industry. Will 2026 bring more of the same? Or will there be a backlash or reaction of some sort? What about the regulatory landscape for AI? Will 2026 bring federal guidelines, or will we have to wait for 2027 or beyond?

All in all, it’s shown that the legal industry, traditionally known as a staid, conservative and risk-averse profession, is undergoing a period of rapid change and transformation.

According to an October report from the Association of Corporate Counsel, generative AI use among in-house lawyers has more than doubled over the last year. More than half of respondents are now actively using generative AI in their practice—compared to only 23% in 2024. The survey also said two-thirds of respondents are using it so that they can eventually rely less on outside counsel, and over 60% are likely to push for a change in how legal services are priced.

When Clio announced that it had acquired global legal research platform vLex for $1 billion in June, it was the latest in a series of big moves from the cloud-based practice management software company.

Querious utilizes the power of generative AI to listen into a conversation and deliver real-time insights based on what it hears. Essentially, it’s like having another person in the room with you—only one who knows all the answers and can access information faster than anyone else.

For decades, the Uniform Bar Examination has been old school, with bar candidates using paper-and-pencil exam books. But starting with the first administration of the NextGen UBE next year, the test will be entirely conducted on the examinees’ personal computers. The ABA Journal’s Julianne Hill talks with Kara Smith, the National Conference of Bar Examiners’ chief product officer.

For lawyers, artificial intelligence agents could completely change the way that they do their jobs, handling things such as legal research, document creation and managing workflows with little human supervision. But if we’ve learned anything since the dawn of the generative AI revolution, the potential benefits of agentic AI come with risks and possible consequences, as well.

When Arizona changed its ethics rules in 2020 opening the door for alternative business structures and nonlawyer ownership for law firms, it sent shock waves throughout the legal industry. Nicole Miller, the chief legal officer of LegalZoom, speaks to the ABA Journal's Victor Li about LegalZoom’s experience in Arizona thus far, as well as general issues relating to regulatory reform and alternative business structures.

Law firms acquire or merge with one another all the time. But when it comes to technology companies, firms usually keep it in-house or enter into a partnership with an outside vendor. They rarely go ahead and just buy a tech company. So when Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton announced in March that it had acquired artificial intelligence products developers Springbok AI, it made headlines.

"May you live in interesting times." For immigration lawyers, that old proverb is now a reality. Ever since the start of the second Trump administration, immigration lawyers have been busier than ever, and they have plenty on their plates.

For one thing, it marks the 40th annual iteration of the show. For another, it promises to be the biggest of all time—emanating for the first time from the McCormick Place Convention Center in Chicago. Techshow co-chair Stephen Embry talks to the ABA Journal’s Victor Li about what to expect from this year’s show.