Document Type
Article
Publication Date
1-2026
Keywords
artificial intelligence, artificial intelligence tools, ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, practice of law, Formal Opinion 512, 512, competence, confidentiality, communication, AI Act, Arkansas
Abstract
In the 1983 movie WarGames, a young computer hacker accidentally accesses a United States military supercomputer programmed to run nuclear war simulations. Four decades after WarGames, lawyers are now facing similar challenges of learning to use and communicate with artificial intelligence––hopefully without destroying the world. Artificial intelligence tools, such as ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini, are quickly being incorporated into legal practice. These systems can draft documents, perform analysis, and support other legal tasks. While lawyers adjust to these new technologies, courts and regulatory authorities are actively developing appropriate frameworks to guide and supervise the use of these tools within the sector.
This first installment in this series lays the foundation with a brief history of artificial intelligence, the rise of generative models, and the problem of “hallucinations” that make these tools especially dangerous for lawyers. It also surveys the first wave of cases, where courts sanctioned attorneys and pro se litigants for relying on hallucinated citations, imposed new procedural safeguards, and began confronting broader disputes over evidence, intellectual property, education, and government transparency. The next installments will shift from cases to rules by examining the American Bar Association’s Formal Opinion 512. Formal Opinion 512 is expansive, so it will be examined in two parts, first through its guidance on competence, confidentiality, and communication, and then through its treatment of candor, supervision, and fees. From there, the series ill turn to the rapidly evolving regulatory landscape, surveying federal inaction, California’s aggressive framework, the European Union’s AI Act, and Arkansas’s initial steps. The final entries in this series will focus on practice by outlining best practices that lawyers can adopt today and previewing the new skills that will define the next frontier of lawyer competence.
Citation
McKinney, C. (2026). Ethics of Artificial Intelligence for Lawyers: Shall We Play a Game? The Rise of Artificial Intelligence and the First Cases. Arkansas Law Notes., 1. Retrieved from https://scholarworks.uark.edu/arlnlaw/23
Included in
Legal Profession Commons, Legal Writing and Research Commons, Science and Technology Law Commons