Augmented Advocacy: Ethical Constrains and Regulatory Gaps in AI-Driven Legal Practice

Authors

• Molly M. Rowlands, West Virginia University College of Law

Document Type

Student Note

Abstract

The rapid advancement of artificial intelligence (“AI”) and particularly generative AI (“Gen AI”) is reshaping the legal profession in unprecedented ways. AI-powered tools enhance efficiency, improve accuracy in legal analysis, and expand access to justice by automating research, contract review, litigation support, and predictive analytics. However, these benefits come with significant ethical, regulatory, and procedural challenges, including competency concerns and AI “hallucinations,” data confidentiality risks, algorithmic bias, and the environmental impact of AI-driven computing. This Note critically examines the evolving role of AI in legal practice and evaluates the inadequacies of existing regulatory frameworks—such as Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Model Rules of Professional Conduct—in addressing the unique risks posed by AI-generated legal content. It explores the divergent responses of law schools, law firms, and federal courts, highlighting the lack of uniformity in academic policies, firm-wide AI governance, and judicial standing orders. To bridge these regulatory gaps and eliminate ongoing piecemeal regulation, this Note proposes a balanced approach that embraces AI innovation while safeguarding ethical and procedural integrity. It offers recommendations for enhancing attorney competency in AI usage, establishing nationwide regulatory consistency, strengthening law firm AI policies, and fostering interdisciplinary collaboration among legal professionals, technologists, and policymakers. By addressing these challenges proactively, the legal profession can integrate AI responsibly and ensure that its transformative potential is realized without undermining the rule of law or public trust in the justice system.

Recommended Citation

Molly M. Rowlands, Augmented Advocacy: Ethical Constrains and Regulatory Gaps in AI-Driven Legal Practice, 128 W. Va. L. Rev. 1143 ().
Available at: https://researchrepository.wvu.edu/wvlr/vol128/iss3/10