Drawing from historical lessons and author Ray Kurzweil鈥檚 predictions to consider the role of the judiciary in the age of AI, which may look very different than today
Artificial Intelligence (AI) moves forward in some incredible way, every day. I鈥檝e done my best to keep up, particularly as it concerns the legal profession, but I鈥檓 certain that as I write this, some new advancement will make old news of even the most recent one.
You can hear more insights from Judge Maritza Dominguez Braswell on here
While much of the current discussion among lawyers and judges has focused on the ethical implications and practical applications of large language models, it鈥檚 important to recognize that AI and other technological advancements extend far beyond that. I鈥檓 convinced we鈥檙e in the midst of a revolution that will fundamentally reshape our world and our roles as judicial officers.
, author and AI visionary at Google, recently published a second book about what he calls, the singularity. In it, he describes the exponential growth of AI capabilities and other technological advancements, predicting that in the not-so-distant future, machine intelligence will surpass that of even the smartest humans. Kurzweil also believes that eventually human and machine intelligence will merge, and AI will be a seamless extension of our brains 鈥� hence the term, singularity.
In physics, the term singularity is used to describe the point at which space-time collapses on itself, and the laws of physics break down. Kurzweil borrows this term to describe the point in time when humans merge with AI via brain-to-computer interfaces, predicting this will occur around 2045.
AI in common use
Consider this: your AI-powered personal assistant 鈥� like Siri or Alexa 鈥� currently operates like an extension of you and your brain. You don鈥檛 have to write a to-do list, just tell Siri to remind you. You don鈥檛 need mental math for your expanded recipe, give it to Co-Pilot, tell it how many people are served by the recipe and how many more you expect, and it will quickly adjust every measurement for you. Eventually, these AI assistants will become so attuned to our activities and preferences that they鈥檒l anticipate our needs and requests.
I鈥檓 convinced we鈥檙e in the midst of a revolution that will fundamentally reshape our world and our roles as judicial officers.
This vision of the future may seem distant, but as Kurzweil explains, AI systems are already being used for incredible breakthroughs. For example, biotech company uses machine learning to detect cancer; and , a machine learning-based algorithm used as an early warning system in medicine, is credited with lowering sepsis deaths by approximately 20%. , which uses x-ray images to train an AI neural network for diagnoses, has outperformed human doctors.
Future AI applications are almost limitless. Imagine a smart watch that so precisely interprets biometric data, that it detects an oncoming heart attack and saves your life. Or one that communicates seamlessly with the cloud so your information can be downloaded by your doctor and your treatment finely tailored to your body鈥檚 specific needs.
According to Kurzweil, these and other biomedical advancements will mean some of us who are alive today may live healthy lives past our current maximum life span of 120 years. In fact, Kurzweil predicts that as a result of dramatic discoveries largely driven by advanced AI, people will achieve 鈥渓ongevity escape velocity鈥� by around 2030.
Taking in all of this, one thing becomes certain: autonomous systems and breakthrough technologies will completely change how we work, live, and play.
The role of the judiciary
This is precisely why the judiciary must be well-attuned. As AI becomes more integrated into our daily lives, new legal issues will emerge. Data privacy laws continue to evolve to address the increased use of AI to collect, analyze, and store data. Intellectual property and copyright disputes will look different as it becomes more difficult to determine ownership. Cybercrime will be increasingly complex. And the federal rules of evidence are already being tested by so-called deepfakes. We once thought a video recording was unassailable 鈥� now, we must think about authenticity in entirely new ways.
In a world in which AI becomes so sophisticated that humans begin to delegate key decision-making to our robo-friends, the judiciary may even have to re-think some of the bedrocks of our legal system 鈥� like the concepts of duty and breach, which may have to stretch or altogether transform.
The need to adapt judicially in the wake of a revolution is nothing new. The invention of the printing press in the 15th century was revolutionary, making the mass production of books and wide dissemination of knowledge possible. With it came an entirely new set of disputes. For example, in England, a were aimed at controlling and censoring what could be printed, resulting in meaningful and unsurprising pushback. On one hand, there was real fear that unchecked printing could spread seditious or heretical ideas; and on the other, people like John Milton began laying the groundwork for our hallowed freedoms of speech and the press. Courts of the time had to grapple with opposing views and navigate the delicate balance between state control and individual rights. Their decisions shaped British law and meaningfully influenced the U.S. Constitution.
We must understand where AI is today, where it鈥檚 going tomorrow, and the many ways it can help us solve humanity鈥檚 greatest challenges.
The Industrial Revolution was another turning point. It transformed economies and brought about significant societal change that required judicial adaptation. For example, with the rise of factories and demand for labor, courts were frequently called upon to protect vulnerable populations. Labor laws evolved to meet the moment. And eventually 鈥� after thousands of factory fatalities and injuries highlighted an urgent need 鈥� 听a new framework was born. The Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 established the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission, an independent agency whose primary function would be to resolve disputes arising from OSHA citations. This was not the first specialized and streamlined adjudicative process to be implemented, but it illustrates how a revolution calls upon the various branches of government to adapt.
We must meet the moment
The AI revolution will similarly call upon us to adjust and advance. This revolution will bring about a societal transformation like no other 鈥� indeed, some compare it to the advent of fire, tools, or agriculture. I believe it will be even more transformative, in part because of the break-neck speed of new developments.
In an open letter from the calling for , labs were accused of engaging in an 鈥渙ut-of-control race to develop and deploy ever more powerful digital minds that no one 鈥� not even their creators 鈥� can understand, predict, or reliably control.鈥� Yet, most of the developed world has now joined this out-of-control race, and very advanced AI is likely to touch every aspect of our lives sooner than we think.
Unfettered AI can have disastrous consequences, we know that already. Lawsuits have been filed towards extremely dangerous behavior, and the fear of an AI-robot takeover is feeling less like science fiction these days. After all, if AI is poised to surpass human intelligence, what鈥檚 to say it can鈥檛 take control and become an existential threat to our species?
But we cannot allow these dangers to paralyze us.
To safeguard against AI鈥檚 peril, we must be willing to grapple with its promise. We must understand where AI is today, where it鈥檚 going tomorrow, and the many ways it can help us solve humanity鈥檚 greatest challenges. Only then 鈥� only when we truly engage and understand AI鈥檚 possibilities and promise 鈥� can we reasonably and appropriately safeguard against the dangers.
Granted, some of this is necessarily the work of lawmakers and regulators, but the judiciary is uniquely positioned to anticipate disputes, understand the legal implications of AI across different industries, and consider how unique adjudicatory frameworks might avoid some of the chaos that follows technological disruption.
History is being written before our very eyes. We are at the beginning of an epochal shift, and our work during this turning point will be age-defining. We must meet the moment to ensure justice for all.
