Preparing Tomorrow’s Lawyers for the Age of AI
A Conversation with Professor George Brown ’17
As artificial intelligence reshapes aspects of the legal profession, Professor George Brown is helping future lawyers navigate the change. Brown teaches in UB School of Law’s Legal, Analysis, Writing and Research Program, which immerses students in the core skills they need to think and write as lawyers. He is a member of UB School of Law’s committee on AI use and is collaborating with professors from UB’s Department of AI and Society, seeking to understand artificial intelligence tools and their effects on professional schools, their practitioners, and society.
We asked Professor Brown for his views on how AI fits into the classroom and how to prepare students to best make use of it in their careers.
Prof. Brown, you offer a unique perspective on AI as both an experienced practitioner and a dedicated educator. Looking ahead, what aspects of legal practice do you think AI will change the most over the next five to ten years?
While we are currently seeing AI impact the way lawyers practice in many ways, I think the biggest change we will see is in the value lawyers provide to their clients. For the past few generations, a lawyer’s value was tied to the billable hour, how much time was spent working on a client’s matter.
Help Shape the Future of AI in Education and Professional Practice.
Participate in UB's Generative AI Use Study.
Given that AI will help lawyers become more efficient, spending less time on tedious and time-consuming tasks, I believe lawyers will now be providing value through the soft skills clients cannot receive from an algorithm – counseling clients through next steps, discussing strategies, negotiations, and critical thinking. AI cannot replace the “thinking like a lawyer” skills that set apart lawyers from AI or the general public.
Which legal skills do you think will become more valuable because of AI, rather than less valuable?
Building off my last answer, the soft skills will be where the real value lies. This is going to require firms and current attorneys to adjust how we raise up our next generation of lawyers. My hope is that this results in more mentorship opportunities for the incoming generation, especially since practicing attorneys will have more time freed up to do this mentoring now that AI is making them more efficient.
We've all heard stories about lawyers submitting AI-generated cases that don't exist. Do those headlines obscure the more important questions about how lawyers should actually use AI?
I believe it can be a double-edged sword. The hallucination stories do accomplish an important goal, forcing lawyers to think critically about their AI use. The old “trust but verify” adage should be how all lawyers approach their AI use, and we should recognize that we cannot replace our ethical obligations by using this tool. It does have the effect of scaring off some lawyers from incorporating this tool, which can put them at a disadvantage in the long run. At some point, our competency requirements under the Professional Rules of Conduct will require lawyers to use and understand these tools, just as lawyers have incorporated technology in the past (think Microsoft Word, email correspondence, and electronic legal research databases).
If you were advising recent UB Law graduates entering practice today, what would you tell them about learning to work with AI?
Graduates are entering legal practice at an exciting time. They will be at the ground floor of this groundbreaking technology, and it can enable them to become experts in fields that did not exist five or ten years ago. Their age and stage put them at an advantage in learning how to really use these tools. But they must also remember that AI is a tool for their toolbox and they still need to find mentors who can help them develop the skills necessary to make effective and ethical use of these tools.
How has AI changed the way you teach legal writing and legal research?
It has forced me to think critically about the assignments I create and ask whether they will be useful in this new landscape. It has made me reach out to practicing attorneys and ask what skills they would want their new hires to have coming into practice.
Do you encourage students to use AI, discourage it, or teach them how to use it responsibly?
I encourage responsible use. I teach the ethical concerns and obligations we must keep in mind when using these tools and I also teach how they can be used to make legal research more efficient.
Legal writing has traditionally been a skill students develop through repetition and feedback. Does AI change that learning process?
No, this process is not one that will change. Repetition and feedback are necessary to understand legal writing, and you cannot effectively use AI unless you have these baseline skills. It has made us consider different types of assignments that will touch on different aspects, such as editing, which will be a critical legal writing skill in an age where the first draft of documents may be created by AI.
Is there something AI simply cannot do that every law student still needs to master?
Critical thinking and reasoning. AI algorithms operate by trying to predict the next logical word or thought based on the input provided. They cannot create an effective legal argument or even understand what the best course of action is for a particular client. We need to shape our students to have these skills so they can effectively implement AI tools into their practice.
UB’s Department of AI and Society is conducting a survey about AI use among professional students and practitioners. How did you get involved and what prompted the survey project?
I worked with Prof. Kenneth Joseph, in UB’s Department of AI and Society, on an AI presentation late last year for the Erie County Bar Association’s Judges Committee. After that presentation, he asked if I would want to join this project. We are interested in seeing how professional students and practitioners are using AI, whether it is being encouraged or discouraged, and how these practitioners and students feel about AI use. We have seen both the legal and medical fields adopt this new technology in various ways and we are really interested in learning more about these trends.
What's one prediction about AI in the legal profession that you think most people would find surprising?
That even among the same firm, same age range, and same level of experience, the views on AI use probably vary heavily, with there being little consensus. I think older generations would be surprised to hear that many newer students are wary about its use. I think some newer generations would be surprised at the sophistication of experienced lawyers putting AI to use to make their practice more efficient and effective.