Fifth Circuit Weighs in on AI Misconduct

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals recently sanctioned an attorney for inaccuracies in AI-generated filings. Issuing a written opinion on the sanctions, the Court clarified that the rules of civil procedure apply equally to AI-generated work. Submitting false information to the court is punishable, whether that information was generated by a human or AI. The court writes:

“Modern generative AI may be a new technology, but the same sanctions rules apply, and the rules we have are well equipped to handle these types of cases. First, Rule 46(c) allows us to discipline an attorney who practices before us for ‘conduct unbecoming a member of the bar or for failure to comply with any court rule.’ Discipline under Rule 46(c) may include monetary sanctions… Conduct ‘unbecoming a member of the bar’ is broad and includes making frivolous arguments and misrepresenting facts or law… The conduct at issue in this case is certainly ‘unbecoming a member of the bar.’ Second, we have the ‘inherent power to impose sanctions for abuse of the judicial process.’ Submitting a brief riddled with fabricated quotations and assertions is such an abuse.”

The court notes in its opinion that the attorney in question was not forthcoming about the use of generative AI. Had she been, the court may have been inclined towards leniency. Lawyers should take note. As generative AI loses its novelty, those using it will see less leniency when things go wrong. AI errors may have been forgivable before they were widely understood. Now, AI errors are a known quantity. Attorneys must uphold the rules of the profession; there are no exceptions for AI.