You’ve likely heard about how artificial intelligence (“AI”) will save everyone — or it will make us alarmingly obsolete. As discussed in the previous AI & the Law series entry, AI use is becoming generally inescapable for current law students. This article will focus on the perspectives of legal professionals, mostly from the Maritimes, regarding AI and students.
*Data Disclaimers: The survey for this relatively random sample sometimes sparked self-selection from folks who redirected me to tech-focused peers or declined to participate because of minimal AI knowledge. Finally, as generally risk-averse people, some professionals may never use spellcheck, but that is not super likely.
Law firms use AI to perform legal research and create or review contracts. In 30 seconds, AI can compose a legal memo bearing similar marks of mediocrity that plague us throughout Legal Research & Writing. We’re students though! We improve over time. We write mediocre memorandums, stomach Shapiro’s criticism, and we try again. Eventually, we recognize the differences between good and bad memos. So, will AI nudge us out, or will we still get the chance to learn these skills as articling and summer students?
Summer students, adaptability, and AI-readiness
Paul Saunders, Stewart McKelvey’s Chief Strategy & Innovation Officer and Partner, gave his time to discuss the future of AI and students in the legal landscape. In our interview, Paul emphasized how the uptake of AI tools have increased the importance of advocacy and soft skills for upcoming lawyers. While he notes that every firm needs to hire “minders, finders, and grinders,” some grinders will be replaced by technology advancements. Yet, the holistic, “T-shaped lawyer” will be more valuable than ever. On in-firm AI use, though Paul encourages summer students to “familiarize themselves with AI generally,” he notes that “[lawyers] don’t use [AI] on client files until it is fully vetted for appropriate use.” Further, he hopes schools will teach the limits of emerging tools, such as AI output bias and confidentiality concerns.
Additionally, Paul warns us of the potential conflict between AI efficiency and student training, especially for law firms using a billable hours model. If AI produces the same value in less time than a student, then firms may opt to assign fewer people on files. What will happen to a generation of lawyers with fewer opportunities for growth? Folks often say there are not many opportunities for those who want practical experience in law school, and many leave law school feeling the anxiety that they are underprepared for the future. Paul is adamant that “if we need to adopt AI, someone still needs to backfill the [student] training so that we’re never overly reliant on AI. We can’t just turn our brains off.” However, if firms allocate fewer resources to train new lawyers and law schools do not train practical skills, then students are left uncertain about their future experience and employment status. Regardless of what students hear about the AI reckoning, the clearest path forward will be to remain flexible and curious about the future — and remember that you are more than just a grinder.
What are other legal professionals thinking about students and AI?
Thank you to all of the legal professionals who helped contribute to this article, both named and anonymous. More legal professionals’ perspectives can be read below.
~2/3 legal professionals report guiding fellow lawyers or students to learn AI tools.
Most respondents believe that the law school should prepare students for AI use.
(More info: with 1 being that schools shouldn’t prepare students, and 10 being that it should definitely prepare students; n = 34, average: 8.3, median: 9, mode: 10.)
James C. Mosher, Chief Innovation Officer & Office Lead Partner at McInnes Cooper
"I have given presentations in my firm on the risks of using Generative AI and the responsibilities to clients. With those issues addressed, and following firm policies, I encourage firm members to discover use cases for their practice.
Understanding the basics of how large language models ("LLMs") and generative AI ("GenAI") work is key. I see GenAI having a generational impact on the practice of law, similar to, but greater than the impact that computerized databases did in the 2000s.
Properly used, the productivity gains from GenAI will be such that lawyers will not be able to service client demands in terms of price, quality, and timeliness if they don't adapt to this new technology."
David Luther, General Counsel & Corporate Secretary at WorkSafeNB
“It's critical for students to have a solid grasp of how to use and deploy AI, including most readily accessible forms of AI, such as out-of-the-box platforms like Spellbook and Alexa Translations.
Students who understand the potential for AI solutions, and also have the technical competence to execute in the development and implementation of solutions (such as understanding how to write script, build databases, and visualize information), will have a real competitive advantage in law firms and legal departments. Understanding AI is increasingly becoming the commodity of success.
Understanding change management is also a real practical skill needed in today's modern law department, particularly as it relates to transformations occurring in the legal tech space.“
Anonymous
Do you have any recommendations for law schools or law students regarding the use or teaching of AI?
“Being open to learning new programs is helpful, but these programs are far from perfect and should not be relied on. Human review is still required. While AI skills should be taught, there should mostly be a heavier focus on legal research, noting up cases, contract drafting principles, etc. so lawyers can effectively vet AI output.”
“Schools should actively integrate AI education into Legal Research and Writing and Internet and Media Law courses, so students are familiar with its advantages and risks—known and emerging.”
"The best AI 'runs' beside a lawyer helping them with their tasks. Lawyers should be taught how best to utilize these tools to be competitive and the best they can be for the future."
"The impact of AI on the practice of law and the business model, including key commoditized revenue streams such as due diligence and litigation document review, and how young talent will be trained, is going to be significant. I think it will be important for law schools to think about the impact and how it might influence career choices for students."
“To craft better advice and understanding, consult with other faculties and professionals for a cross-disciplinary approach (e.g., data scientists and software engineers) to understand scope of already available AI and emerging AI.”
“As much as I will avoid using it, I feel it is impossible to keep AI out of the legal profession. I hope that as we transition into its use, the user will review the AI results and make sure they are accurate before submitting them.”
If you’ve used, encouraged, or taught AI skills, could you elaborate on what that looked like (e.g., for research, memo writing, email drafting)?
“[I've used it f]or E-discovery training, trademark searches, and legal research.”
“In applied legal work, like researching cases and drafting contracts.”
“For organizing disparate ideas and making complex thoughts simple or saving time and mental energy when writing anything: memos, emails, and etc.”
“As a good reading partner for case law, and to summarize cases and search for certain topics—though AI cannot be trusted regarding facts, which is still a major limitation and risk to its use.”
“[I've encouraged the use of AI tools f]or research and memo writing in particular, but they only serve as a start.”
“To streamline searching for case law in documents.”
“Our firm has a program to educate and has tools. We focus on how to use it but, more importantly, how not to use it.”
“No.”
“Made sure students understand AI's limits—its pros and cons, uses and risks.”
Comments