Contrapposto — from sateeshnori.substack.com by Sateesh Nori We are losing the war for Access to Justice. And we keep aiming our attacks on our own side. .
“To Public Interest Lawyers of Any Kind:
Only when you have vanquished every eviction notice that shouldn’t have been filed… Only when you have defeated every predatory landlord, every wage thief, every debt collector armed with a default judgment… Only when you have lifted the burden from every tenant who faced Housing Court alone… Only when every family has shelter and every worker has been paid what they’re owed… Only when every immigrant has had someone in their corner and every person in crisis has had a lawyer who showed up… Only when every child aging out of foster care has had counsel, and every survivor of domestic violence has had an advocate who knew the system cold…
Only then — only when you have directed your energy toward the real adversaries: the justice gap, the underfunded courts, the 92% who never get a lawyer at all — only then can you attack another public interest lawyer for the tools they chose to fight with.”
The unbundling of lawyer institutions — from jordanfurlong.substack.com by Jordan Furlong AI will strip law firms and law schools of their commodity features. Their future depends on whether they can rebuild around their highest-value functions and their trust-bearing core.
Two very different articles — one from a law professor, one from a legal technology analyst — crossed my desk last month. They each say something really important about law schools and law firms, respectively. But taken together, they point us towards what I think is an even more profound reality about lawyer institutions in the post-AI world.
At his eponymous Substack, Professor Michael Plaxton’s “To Our Next Law Dean” is really addressed to every dean of every law school, asking: After AI, how will you justify our existence? His concern is that AI is rapidly learning to perform many of the tasks law schools train students to do, and to deliver much of the general legal knowledge law schools provide at scale, including research, writing, analysis, and explanation.
…
At Legal Technology Hub, Nikki Shaver’s “Law Firms Want to Change; They Just Can’t” asks whether law firms are capable of managing the transition to a post-AI legal market.
Law schools and law firms are the legal profession’s most important institutions. But they were built for a world in which legal intelligence was scarce, and that world is rapidly passing away.
The conversation focuses on how modern generative AI and Large Language Models (LLMs) act as a legal operating system to simplify contract reviews, document drafting, and client intake, while maintaining essential connections to human attorneys.
Easy to miss: Anthropic named the Justice Technology Association as the access-to-justice partner in the launch. The cost floor just dropped (while the product got better) for consumer legal. Law Firm 2.0 gets the headlines. A2J and direct-to-consumer is the largest white space in legal.
It has been a crazy 48 hours. We released Lavern as open source.
An agentic legal system, six months in the making, 155,000+ lines of code, 67 specialist agents, nine workflows, and at least ten things inside it that you could make as a separate product.
I was a bit anxious, like I was organising a kids’ party with balloons, unsure if anyone would come.
[On May 12, 2026, we introduced] 20+ new MCP connectors that link Claude to the software the legal industry already relies on, and 12 new plugins tailored to specific legal work and practice areas. And finally, we’re partnering with the Free Law Project, the Justice Technology Association, and others working to put legal help within reach of people who can’t currently access it. .
We have been building toward this moment, and now it’s finally arrived. Anthropic has formally launched ‘Claude For Legal’, a comprehensive offering that could reshape the legal tech world and places the LLM-maker at the heart of the market. (See below Artificial Lawyer interview with Mark Pike, Anthropic Associate General Counsel.)
Legal tech companies from Thomson Reuters and LexisNexis, to Harvey and Legora, are all participants in one way or another, in what is a bold strategic move that changes the legal tech market in ways that would have been unimaginable just a few years ago. (Plus, see comments from Harvey and TR below.) And of course, Freshfields has already gone all-in with Claude, while other major firms are also deeply exploring what it can do.
Claude for Legal will manifest itself across four main paths and builds on work that has already been developed:
‘New Legal Plugins: …
New MCP Connectors: …
Open-source Ecosystem: …
Plus, Free Law Project & Justice Technology Association Partnerships: …
The Justice Technology Association (JTA), a nonprofit trade group representing mission-driven companies focused on the access to justice crisis, announced today that it has joined Anthropic as a launch partner in what Anthropic is calling its first comprehensive legal vertical initiative.
The announcement comes as part of a much-broader announcement by Anthropic of its push into the legal industry, as it just released more than 20 MCP connectors to legal tech products and 12 practice-area plugins for Claude.
“Legal services are out of reach for many people and small businesses, and the gap is widening,” Anthropic said in its announcement. “We’re working with the Free Law Project, Justice Technology Association and other legal aid and public service organizations to help make legal services more affordable and available.”
That makes this the first time that a leading AI company is explicitly naming access to justice as a foundational pillar,JTA says, with Anthropic positioning the initiative as “investing in the premise that AI should expand access to justice — making legal services more affordable and available.”
Anthropic today took its biggest step yet into the legal market, releasing more than 20 new MCP connectors linking Claude to the software that law firms and legal departments run on, along with 12 new plugins tailored to specific legal practice areas.
Today’s announcement builds on the legal plugin Anthropic released in early February for Claude Cowork — the agentic desktop tool the company introduced in January as “Claude Code for the rest of your work.”
In the months since that initial release, Anthropic says legal professionals have become the most engaged Cowork users of any knowledge-work function, a statistic that likely accelerated this deeper push.
ANTHROPIC JUST OPEN-SOURCED A COMPLETE AI LEGAL SYSTEM COVERING 10 PRACTICE AREAS. 100% FREE.
80+ NAMED AGENTS handling
– contracts
– employment
– litigation
– privacy, IP
– corporate work. All of it
We welcome back Sabastian Niles, President and Chief Legal Officer at Salesforce, to discuss his recent “Open Letter to Law Firms.” As the legal industry hits a critical inflection point, Sabastian argues that the era of “AI theater” and small-scale pilots is over.
The conversation dives deep into the Innovator’s Dilemma facing law firms, the shift toward agentic AI, and how firms must reimagine their business models to remain competitive. Sabastian highlights that legal professionals are uniquely positioned to lead the charge in trusted AI transformation, provided they embrace transparency, data integration, and shared efficiency gains with their clients.
Three Realities for the Modern Legal Firm To lead in this landscape, there are three realities every firm leader must understand:
Competition is intensifying: …
Client expectations will reshape the market: Clients are no longer asking whether firms use AI. Rather, they’re expecting to see the benefits of that transformation passed directly to them. They expect more for less but are not simply seeking lower costs – they want more insight, more speed, and more value for every dollar of their budget. And law firms, which operate at the center of data, ethics, and risk, have outsized influence over the structure and deployment of trusted AI across all industries. Some clients, like Salesforce, are even creating agentic tools to improve the law firm’s experience when working with clients. …
Unified client intelligence is at the heart of legal strategy: …
Are AI First Firms a Threat To Biglaw? — from legallydisrupted.com by Zach Abramowitz and Logan Brown Episode 49 features AI first law firm founder Logan Brown
Is Big Law about to become the Yellow Pages? Hey, I didn’t say it, but ex-Cooley lawyer turned AI first law firm Logan Brown did. The question is do I agree?
.
Instead of the traditional billable hour, they charge flat fees like $100 for a contract review or $50 to ask a lawyer a quick question via chat. She’s already got over 40 attorneys on the platform. And in a departure from the traditional partnership track, she actually chose to raise venture capital so she could scale the firm like a tech company and tackle the access-to-justice gap.
From DSC: LOVE to hear anything and everything regarding efforts to address the access-to-justice gap here in the United States!!! Along these lines, also see:
“Legal services are out of reach for many people and small businesses, and the gap is widening,” Anthropic said in its announcement. “We’re working with the Free Law Project, Justice Technology Association and other legal aid and public service organizations to help make legal services more affordable and available.”
That makes this the first time that a leading AI company is explicitly naming access to justice as a foundational pillar, JTA says, with Anthropic positioning the initiative as “investing in the premise that AI should expand access to justice — making legal services more affordable and available.”
What AI hallucinations in law actually are
In a legal context, AI hallucinations are one of two things. They’re either citations to cases or statutes that don’t exist, or citations to real authorities for propositions those authorities don’t actually support.
The first kind is the one making headlines. A lawyer or pro se litigant uses a general-purpose chatbot like ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Copilot, or Grok to help draft a brief. The model, predicting the statistically likely next word, decides a citation belongs in a particular spot, and produces one. The reporter might be real. The volume number might fall within the right range. The Bluebook formatting is often better than what most associates produce. The case itself just doesn’t exist.
The second kind is older than AI. Lawyers have always occasionally cited a case for a proposition that the case doesn’t stand for. AI has made this kind of error easier to commit and easier to catch.
A dangerous mind — from by Jordan Furlong Generative AI is a tireless genius with no boundaries. Use it carelessly, and it can usurp your voice, overwrite your ideas, and steal your originality. Make sure you safeguard your capacity to think.
Don’t let the genius do the hard work for you. The more incisive and unique your own thinking — the more you battle and struggle and eventually succeed in getting your ideas and insights out — the more you can benefit from the AI’s complementary improvements. The great irony of Gen AI is that it actually makes your own cognitive processes your most valuable asset.
So safeguard your mind. Defend your right to think as only you can. And if you don’t want AI to replace you, then don’t send it a written invitation.
The pilot phase is over. After two years of experimentation for legal departments, 2026 will be the year AI moves from “interesting tool” to “operational infrastructure,” whether they’re ready or not. We surveyed predictions from Gartner, Forrester, McKinsey, and other leading legal tech analysts to identify where expert consensus is forming. The implications for AI governance, outside counsel relationships, and regulatory compliance are significant.
Nvidia has backed Swedish AI legal tech Legora in a $50 million Series D extension, CNBC can reveal.
The chip giant has been ramping up startup investments in recent years.
Investors have been piling into to promising young AI companies as they bet big on the commercial potential of tech to reshape entire industries and bring big efficiency gains.
Legora is its first bet in the legal tech sector, according to Dealroom data.
… The AI startup is building AI agents and tools to help lawyers automate and streamline workflows.
Recording at LegalWeek in New York, Zach sits down with Shlomo Klapper (founder of Learned Hand) and Bridget McCormack, former Chief Justice of the Michigan Supreme Court and now CEO of the American Arbitration Association, to challenge one of the biggest double standards in legal AI: “AI for me, but not for thee.” Lawyers are now widely using AI like #Harvey and #Legora — and now more than ever #claude — but the moment it touches judges or arbitrators, support drops off.
That hesitation comes as courts are under real strain, with judges handling thousands of cases a year and only minutes to decide each one, and no realistic way to keep up. Shlomo describes Learned Hand’s “AI law clerk,” built to support judicial research, analysis, and drafting, while Bridget brings the perspective of someone who has both made decisions on the bench and has pioneered the American Arbitration Association’s AI Arbitrator, a first of its kind. The conversation moves beyond AI as an assistant and into a harder shift: AI as part of decision-making itself, and whether the system can continue to function without it.
This brings us to an admitted, glaring double standard between lawyers and judges. Lawyers are totally fine with lawyers using AI, but those same lawyers become apoplectic at the thought of judges or arbitrators using AI. It is very much “AI for me, but not for thee.” A survey last year from White & Case and Queen Mary University of London School of Law showed that nearly 90% of lawyers were deeply supportive of AI for their own research and analytics, but that support drops to just 23% when it comes to a judge or arbitrator using it to make a decision.
…
Yet, despite that hullabaloo, there is a massive need for alternative forms of intelligence in our courts. Right now, the system is drowning. We have state court trial judges disposing of 2,500 cases a year, meaning they have barely half an hour to spend on a single case. We are simply not going to lawyer our way out of this 50-year backlog. If we just use humans, we have a massive demand for intelligence but a severely limited supply. AI could step in to give these judges the capacity they desperately need for the courts to actually function.
Law Firm AI Adoption: So Many Choices — from abovethelaw.com by Stephen Embry Firms need to recognize reality, define what their legal professionals need, and then determine how to adopt and govern the use of AI tools.
It’s tough to be a law firm managing partner in the age of AI. So many choices, so little time. It’s like the proverbial kid in the candy store who has so many choices that they either can’t pick out anything or reach for too much. We see evidence of the first option in 8am’s recent outstanding Legal Industry Report, authored by Niki Black.
8am’s Legal Industry Report One thing that stood out in the report was the discrepancy between use of AI by individual legal professionals and what firms are doing when it comes to AI adoption and guidance. Almost 75% of those who responded said they were using general purpose AI tools like ChatGPT and Claude for work purposes. That’s pretty significant.
AI for good While focusing on the risks of AI going wrong, it is only fair to mention the conversations I had around using AI for good. Two in particular stand out.
The first is the news from Everlaw that its Everlaw for Good Program has, over the past year, supported more than 675 active cases across 235 organisations, and expanded its support to a growing network of non-profit organisations.
The program extends Everlaw’s technology to organisations working to advance access to justice.In a recent survey by Everlaw, 88% of legal aid professionals said they are optimistic about AI’s potential to help narrow the justice gap.
“Mission-driven organizations are increasingly handling complex investigations and litigation with limited resources,” said Joanne Sprague, head of Everlaw for Good. “Expanding access to powerful, easy-to-use technology helps level the playing field so these teams can uncover critical evidence, take on more complex matters, and yield stronger results for the communities they serve.”
The bulk of our conversation focuses on generative AI, and how Everlaw has approached it differently than much of the market. Rather than bolting on a chatbot, AJ says, Everlaw embedded AI deliberately throughout the platform — document summarization, coding suggestions, deposition analysis, fact extraction — always grounding responses in the actual documents at hand and citing sources so users can verify the work. The December launch of Deep Dive, which lets litigators pose a question and get a synthesized, cited answer drawn from an entire document corpus in about a minute, is the feature AJ calls a “new era” for discovery — one he genuinely believes represents a categorical shift.
“Future of Professionals Report” analysis: Why AI will flip law firm economics — from thomsonreuters.com by Ragunath Ramanathan AI forces a reinvention of law firm billing models, the market will reward those firms that price by outcome, guarantee efficiency, and are transparent. The question then isn’t whether to change — it’s whether firms will stand on the sidelines or lead
Key insights:
Efficiency and cost savings are expected— AI is significantly increasing efficiency and reducing costs in the legal industry, with each lawyer expecting to save 190 work-hours per year by leveraging AI, resulting in approximately $20 billion worth of work-savings in the US alone.
Challenges to the billable hour model— The traditional billable hour model is being challenged by AI advancements, as lawyers are now able to complete tasks more efficiently and quickly, leading some law firms to explore alternative pricing models that reflect the value delivered rather than the time spent.
Opportunities for smaller law firms— AI presents unique opportunities for smaller law firms to differentiate themselves and compete with larger firms, as AI solutions allow smaller firms to access advanced technology without significant investment and deliver innovative pricing models.
The legal industry is undergoing a significant transformation that’s being driven by the rapid adoption of AI — a shift that is poised to redefine traditional practices, particularly the billable hour model, a cornerstone of law firm operations.
…
Not surprisingly, AI is anticipated to have the biggest impact on the legal industry over the next five years, with 80% of law firm survey respondents to Thomson Reuters recently published 2025 Future of Professionals report saying that they expect AI to fundamentally alter how they conduct business, especially around how law firms price, staff, and deliver legal work to their clients.
5 Your love, Lord, reaches to the heavens, your faithfulness to the skies. 6 Your righteousness is like the highest mountains, your justice like the great deep. You, Lord, preserve both people and animals. 7 How priceless is your unfailing love, O God! People take refuge in the shadow of your wings.
7 “Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you.8 For everyone who asks receives; the one who seeks finds; and to the one who knocks, the door will be opened.
The numbers are stark: 92% of low-income Americans receive no help with substantial civil legal problems, while small claims filings have plummeted 32% in just four years. But AI is changing the game. By making legal procedures accessible to pro se litigants and supercharging legal aid organizations, these tools are reviving dormant disputes and opening courthouse doors that have been effectively closed to millions.
For lawyers, paralegals, compliance professionals, and legal tech specialists, 2025 is shaping up to be a strong hiring year. According to a new LawCrossing report, theTop 50 Legal Employers Hiring Now highlights a wave of open positions across law firms, corporations, government agencies, and universities — a snapshot of where demand is highest and where job-seekers should be focusing their efforts.
… The Types of Employers on the List The Top 50 Legal Employers Hiring Now spans a diverse set of organizations:
Corporate Legal Departments: …
Law Firms: …
Government Agencies: …
Universities and Nonprofits: …
This diversity means opportunities exist for professionals at many career stages, whether you are a new graduate seeking entry-level work, a mid-career attorney looking for stability, or a seasoned litigator hoping to move in-house.
.
U.S. law schools are experiencing a surge unlike anything seen in over a decade, with first-year J.D. classes hitting record sizes this fall. The unprecedented boom follows an 18 % year-over-year jump in applications, fueled by a mix of economic uncertainty, political engagement, and strong job prospects for recent graduates.
On September 16, members of the IAALS Lawyers Council gathered in downtown Denver to discuss the growing momentum of alternative business structures with Arizona Chief Justice Ann A. Scott Timmer and Jess Bednarz, IAALS’ Director of Legal Services and the Profession.
Arizona is on the frontlines of this movement, and Chief Justice Timmer talked about how alternative business structures have led to meaningful innovations in how lawyers in Arizona provide legal services.
Chief Justice Timmer credits a culture of innovation in Arizona for providing the ability for lawyers and businesses to try new ways of delivering legal services. She emphasized that lawyers are still at the heart of the practice of law in these alternative business structures, and that the structures allow lawyers to have added resources to innovate and reach more clients. This creativity has led to businesses and innovations that make the legal system easier to access, like financial planners and lawyers combining businesses or an app that helps people start the process of expunging criminal records.
With as many as 120 million legal problems going unresolved in America each year, traditional lawyer-centered approaches to access to justice have consistently failed to meet the scale of need. But what if the solution is not just about providing more legal services — what if it lies in fundamentally rethinking who can provide legal help?
In today’s episode, host Bob Ambrogi is joined by two of the nation’s leading researchers on access to justice: Rebecca Sandefur, professor and director of the Sanford School of Social and Family Dynamics at Arizona State University and a faculty fellow at the American Bar Foundation, and Matthew Burnett, director of research and programs for the Access to Justice Research Initiative at the American Bar Foundation and an adjunct professor of law at Georgetown University Law Center.
Aiming to discover more about AI’s impact on the intellectual property (IP) field, Questel recently released the findings of its 2025 IP Outlook Research Report entitled “Pathways to Productivity: AI in IP”, the much-awaited follow-up to its inaugural 2024 study “Beyond the Hype: How Technology is Transforming IP.” The 2025 Report (“the Report”) polled over 500 patent and trademark professionals from various continents and countries across the globe.
As artificial intelligence reshapes the legal profession, both in-house and outside counsel face two major—but not unprecedented—challenges.
The first is how to harness transformative technology while maintaining the rigorous standards that define effective legal practice.
The second is how to ensure that new technology doesn’t impair the training and development of new lawyers.
Rigorous standards and apprenticeship are foundational aspects of lawyering. Preserving and integrating both into our use of AI will be essential to creating a stable and effective AI-enabled legal practice.
Every technology vendor pitching to law firms leads with the same promise: our solution will save you time. They’re lying, and they know it. The truth about AI in legal practice isn’t that it will reduce work. It’s that it will explode the volume of work while fundamentally changing what that work looks like.
New practice areas will emerge overnight. AI compliance law is already booming. Algorithmic discrimination cases are multiplying. Smart contract disputes need lawyers who understand both code and law. The metaverse needs property rights. Cryptocurrency needs regulation. Every technological advance creates legal questions that didn’t exist yesterday.
The skill shift will be brutal for lawyers who resist.
Finalists have been named for the 2025 American Legal Technology Awards, which honor exceptional achievement in various aspects of legal technology.
The awards recognize achievement in various categories related to legal technology, such as by a law firm, an individual, or an enterprise.
The awards will be presented on Oct. 15 at a gala dinner on the eve of the Clio Cloud Conference in Boston, Mass. The dinner will be held at Suffolk Law School.
September 15, 2025 — Stanford, CA — Stanford Law School today announced the launch of the Legal Innovation through Frontier Technology Lab, or liftlab, to explore how artificial intelligence can reshape legal services—not just to make them faster and cheaper, but better and more widely accessible.
Led by Professor Julian Nyarko and Executive Director Megan Ma, liftlab is among the first academic efforts in legal AI to unite research, prototyping, and real-time collaboration with industry. While much of AI innovation in law has so far focused on streamlining routine tasks, liftlab is taking a broader and more ambitious approach. The goal is to tap AI’s potential to fundamentally change the way legal work serves society.
The divergence of law firms from lawyers— from jordanfurlong.substack.com by Jordan Furlong LLMs’ absorption of legal task performance will drive law firms towards commoditized service hubs while raising lawyers to unique callings as trustworthy legal guides — so long as we do this right.
Generative AI is going to weaken and potentially dissolve that relationship. Law firms will become capable of generating output that can be sold to clients with no lawyer involvement at all.
Right now, it’s possible for an ordinary person to obtain from an LLM like ChatGPT-5 the performance of a legal task — the provision of legal analysis, the production of a legal instrument, the delivery of legal advice — that previously could only be acquired from a human lawyer.
Professional-grade agentic AI systems are architecturally distinct from consumer chatbots, utilizing domain-specific data and robust verification mechanisms to deliver the high accuracy and reliability essential for legal work, whereas consumer tools prioritize conversational flow using unvetted web data.
True agentic AI for legal professionals offers transparent, multi-agent workflows, integrates with authoritative legal databases for verification, and applies domain-specific reasoning to understand legal nuances, unlike traditional chatbots that lack this complexity and autonomy.
When evaluating legal AI, professionals should avoid solutions that lack workflow transparency, offer no human checkpoints for oversight, and cannot integrate with professional databases, ensuring the chosen tool enhances, rather than replaces, expert judgment.
If you’re a lawyer wondering whether to take the leap into entrepreneurship, I understand the apprehension that comes with leaving a predictable path. Embracing the fear, uncertainty, challenges, and constant evolution integral to an entrepreneur’s journey has been worth it for me.
AI is already adept at doing what law school trained us to do — identifying risks, spotting issues, and referencing precedent. What it’s not good at is nuance, trust, or judgment — skills that define great lawyering.
When AI handles some of the drudgery — like contract clause spotting and formatting — it gives us something precious back: time. That time forces lawyers to stop hiding behind legalese and impractical analysis. It allows — and even demands — that we communicate like leaders.
Imagine walking into a business meeting and, instead of delivering a 20-page memo, offering a single slide with a recommendation tied directly to company goals. That’s not just good lawyering; that’s leadership. And AI may be the catalyst that gets us there.
AI changes the game. When generative tools can translate clauses into plain English, the old value proposition of complexity begins to crumble. The playing field shifts — from who can analyze the most thoroughly to who can communicate the most clearly.
That’s not a threat. It’s an opportunity — one for lawyers to become better partners to the business by focusing on what matters most: sound judgment delivered in plain language.
