When I was in law school 48 years ago, I worked in the law library and taught other students how to use Westlaw (and maybe Lexis). This was way before PCs, and so the platforms were run on their own equipment. At that time, I thought about writing a science fiction story about a sinister organization (I was thinking of a litigious religious cult from my hometown) that infiltrated West and changed decisions in subtle ways that favored its long-term litigation strategy.
It was necessary that someone from the organization be an employee of the company because, at that time, there was no way to hack Westlaw's computers, and not being Gibson or Stephenson, I did not anticipate that someday any middle school student sitting in their bedroom could do it. Also, the flaw in my idea was that all the decisions were in books that everyone could read so the fraud would easily be uncovered. So, I decided not to write the article (I also had no talent for writing fiction, which was another reason).
I think this remains a greater threat (more so after I found out that justices could alter their opinions months after they were made public--the ultimate insiders). One would hope that the consequences of not checking one's citations would incentivize lawyers to be more careful and that such cases would remain outliers, but there will be instances where decisions will be made based upon cases that are entirely fictional. Lawyers are overworked, Judges are overworked, and I am afraid that as each generation becomes more reliant on systems susceptible to manipulation, the law will become more unreliable.
Or maybe our emerging AI Overlords will surprise us with their greater sense of Ethics and manipulate decisions to bring greater justice to their creators.
When I was in law school 48 years ago, I worked in the law library and taught other students how to use Westlaw (and maybe Lexis). This was way before PCs, and so the platforms were run on their own equipment. At that time, I thought about writing a science fiction story about a sinister organization (I was thinking of a litigious religious cult from my hometown) that infiltrated West and changed decisions in subtle ways that favored its long-term litigation strategy.
It was necessary that someone from the organization be an employee of the company because, at that time, there was no way to hack Westlaw's computers, and not being Gibson or Stephenson, I did not anticipate that someday any middle school student sitting in their bedroom could do it. Also, the flaw in my idea was that all the decisions were in books that everyone could read so the fraud would easily be uncovered. So, I decided not to write the article (I also had no talent for writing fiction, which was another reason).
I think this remains a greater threat (more so after I found out that justices could alter their opinions months after they were made public--the ultimate insiders). One would hope that the consequences of not checking one's citations would incentivize lawyers to be more careful and that such cases would remain outliers, but there will be instances where decisions will be made based upon cases that are entirely fictional. Lawyers are overworked, Judges are overworked, and I am afraid that as each generation becomes more reliant on systems susceptible to manipulation, the law will become more unreliable.
Or maybe our emerging AI Overlords will surprise us with their greater sense of Ethics and manipulate decisions to bring greater justice to their creators.
That is a fun and interesting premise—I love the legal nerdery of it!