Could Artificial Intelligence replace the Supreme Court?

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury — that’s you, dear readers — don’t short-circuit your sensibilities just yet. The notion of Artificial Intelligence (AI) ascending the bench to replace the venerable justices of the Supreme Court is not a motion we are seriously proposing but a hypothetical to test the limits of our technological imaginations and, perhaps, our patience. This article is not intended to serve as a definitive prediction but to provoke thought on the implications of technological advancements. I’m also not presenting a side on the cases or decisions by the court. Today’s case presented to the court on whether former President Trump can be removed from the primary presidential election ballot is contentious and historic. It is truly an interesting time to witness these events unfold. Why not use it as a test to consider other challenges our society, perhaps our democracy, faces?

U.S. Supreme Court Overview: A Jurisdiction of Humans, by Humans, for Humans

The United States Supreme Court, a hallowed institution more steeped in tradition than a teabag in hot water, operates on the quaint notion of human discretion. They choose which legal kerfuffles to untangle, a mere 80 out of the more than 7,000 cases that clamor for attention like seagulls at a beach picnic. These cases range from the weighty matters of life and death to whether the Constitution covers the right to blast music from your porch (it doesn’t, neighbors rejoice).

One of the primary factors considered is resolving a conflict of law. The U.S. judicial system comprises 13 federal circuits and 50 state supreme courts. When these courts reach different conclusions about an issue of federal or constitutional law, the Supreme Court may step in to resolve the dispute, ensuring uniformity in applying the law across the country. Another significant factor is the importance of the case. The Supreme Court is more likely to hear cases that present significant social issues, such as those involving abortion, the death penalty, or other matters of substantial public interest. These cases often have far-reaching implications for American society and may address unresolved legal questions or clarify constitutional rights.

The Court also looks for cases that answer important constitutional questions or affect the entire nation, such as those dealing with state powers, individual rights to expression, and the freedom of the press. Cases with unique features, such as disagreements among lower courts on an issue, are also more likely to be heard by the Supreme Court, as these situations allow the Court to clarify the law​​​​.

The process of deciding which cases to hear involves a thorough review of petitions for certiorari by the justices and their clerks. This review summarizes each petition and recommends whether the Court should take the case. If at least four of the nine justices vote to accept a case, the Court will proceed to hear it. This “Rule of Four” is crucial to the Supreme Court’s decision-making process​​. Once a case is selected for hearing, the parties submit briefs summarizing the issues, facts, and legal arguments. Amicus curiae briefs from interested parties not directly involved in the case may also be submitted to provide additional perspectives. The justices and their law clerks then prepare for oral arguments, which involve directly questioning the attorneys representing the parties. Oral arguments serve multiple purposes, including clarifying the justices’ understanding of the case, exploring the implications of potential rulings, and providing a public forum for discussing the case’s merits.

The Supreme Court’s decisions are influenced by the arguments presented and broader legal principles, including stare decisis (adhering to precedent), constitutional and statutory law interpretation, and considerations of justice, equity, and societal impact. The Court operates under a principle of impartiality, aiming to make decisions based on law rather than political or personal opinions. Justices may adopt different interpretative philosophies, such as originalism, which emphasizes the text’s original meaning at the time it was enacted, or a more pragmatic approach, considering the Constitution as a living document that should be interpreted in the context of contemporary society​​.

This comprehensive process ensures that the Supreme Court’s decisions are well-considered, drawing on a broad range of legal arguments and principles to address some of the country’s most significant legal questions.

What Would an AI-Powered Court Compute?

In 2020, Peter W. Singer and August Cole co-authored “Burn-in: A Novel of the Real Robotic Revolution.” The book is set in the near future and blends a gripping narrative with factual research on the potential impact of technology and artificial intelligence on society. It explores a future where the integration of artificial intelligence into everyday life fundamentally changes numerous professions, including aspects of the legal profession. The inference that AI could eliminate the need for human involvement in certain legal tasks, such as litigation or drafting legal documents like wills and powers of attorney, stems from the book’s broader thematic exploration of how technology can automate tasks that traditionally require human expertise and judgment.

But could AI don Supreme Court robes? The thought of AI delivering verdicts with the clinical efficiency of a food processor is as enticing as it is terrifying. On the one hand, AI could slice through legal jargon with the precision of a laser-guided pizza cutter. Conversely, it might struggle with the meatier ethical questions, like whether robots deserve a 401(k). The idea of AI replacing the Supreme Court involves a complex interplay of technological, legal, ethical, and practical considerations. While AI and machine learning technologies have advanced significantly, the prospect of entirely replacing human judges, particularly at the level of the Supreme Court, raises several pros and cons.

Assuming a significant advancement in AI over the next ten years, the landscape of pros and cons regarding AI’s potential role in the judiciary, particularly in functions akin to those of the Supreme Court, could evolve as follows:

The Pros

Improved natural language processing and machine learning algorithms may enable AI to understand better the nuances of legal language, context, and the complexities of societal values, narrowing the gap in current nuanced understanding.

With advancements in AI ethics and bias detection, future AI systems could be designed to identify and mitigate their biases more effectively, potentially surpassing human judges in fairness and impartiality.

Advances in AI explainability could make the decision-making processes of AI in the judiciary more transparent, addressing current concerns about the “black box” nature of AI decisions.

Emerging AI technologies might incorporate models that simulate aspects of human empathy and moral reasoning, allowing for more humane and ethically sound judgments.

The Cons

Even with advancements, AI might still struggle with cases requiring deep ethical considerations, personal rights issues, and decisions that impact broad societal norms, as these often involve subjective judgment beyond data analysis.

Greater reliance on AI in the judiciary could lead to new vulnerabilities, including cybersecurity risks, manipulation of AI systems, and the potential loss of human legal expertise and oversight.

The societal acceptance of AI judges, especially in high-stakes roles like the Supreme Court, may still pose a challenge as public trust in AI’s ability to make life-altering decisions evolves.

The development of comprehensive legal and regulatory frameworks to govern the use of AI in judicial decisions may lag behind technological advancements, leading to legal uncertainties and challenges.

While technological advancements could address some of the current limitations and concerns regarding AI in the judiciary, new challenges and considerations will likely emerge. These advancements will necessitate ongoing dialogue among technologists, legal professionals, ethicists, and policymakers to ensure that the integration of AI into the legal system enhances justice while preserving the core values and principles underpinning the legal system.

Ethical Circuitry: Can AI Learn to Love the Law?

The law is a living, breathing document, or so we like to romantically believe. It embodies our moral compass, pointing north to “Justice” and occasionally spinning wildly when we hit ethical dilemmas. AI might one day be trained to navigate this moral maze, but it’s a journey fraught with technical potholes and ethical speed bumps. For several reasons, ethical considerations are fundamentally important in interpreting the law and the Constitution. The law is not just a set of rules but reflects society’s ethical and moral values. Ethical considerations guide the interpretation and application of laws in a manner consistent with societal norms and values. This alignment ensures that laws serve their intended purpose of promoting justice, equity, and the common good.

The legal system’s legitimacy depends on public trust, which is grounded in the belief that laws are applied and interpreted ethically and fairly. Ethical considerations in legal interpretation help maintain this trust by ensuring that decisions are made with integrity and respect for human dignity and consider the broader impacts on society. The interpretation of the Constitution involves balancing competing rights and freedoms. Ethical considerations are crucial in these interpretations to ensure that fundamental rights are protected and that limitations on rights are justified and proportionate to the aims being pursued.

Ethical considerations allow the law to adapt to evolving societal norms and values. As societies change, ethical perspectives on equality, privacy, and freedom might shift. Incorporating these ethical considerations into legal interpretations allows the law to remain relevant and responsive to societal expectations. Many legal disputes involve complex ethical dilemmas where laws may offer conflicting guidance. Ethical considerations play a critical role in resolving these conflicts, guiding judges and legal practitioners to interpretations that best align with overarching principles of justice and morality.

AI can be trained to understand and apply societal moral values; doing so in practice presents significant technical, ethical, and practical challenges. Advancements in AI ethics and technology and ongoing multidisciplinary collaboration are key to moving closer to this goal.

In Summation: Will AI Robes Ever Flap in the Halls of Justice?

While we daydream of an AI Justice delivering verdicts in a calm robotic monotone, let’s not forget the charm of human imperfection that graces our current legal system. The Supreme Court, with all its flesh-and-blood wisdom, remains the guardian of our liberties, at least until AI learns to appreciate the dramatic pause and the weight of a well-timed gavel drop. Until then, we’ll watch with bemusement as this debate unfolds, a testament to our time-honored tradition of asking, “What if?” with the gleam of a sci-fi enthusiast and the grounded skepticism of a seasoned lawyer (not me).