"AI" has a long way to go before it can truly be useful for our type of practice, but it's been a real boost for shitlawyers and for biglawyers who are dumb.
We have some small cases now and then, and sometimes big cases with idiots on the other side. Once I got the feel for opposing counsel's abilities, it used to be easy to make arguments that weren't exactly winning arguments, but you could cite a whole bunch of shit and use fancy words, and pretty well count on the other side not to be able to respond effectively, or find the right cases undermining the argument. But it's a pain now because even legit idiots can feed your brief into a machine that's way smarter than they are, and find the weaknesses that they never would have detected on their own.
It's more nuanced than that. It still doesn't help idiots develop strategy or ask the right questions, which is my main point, and the main strength of good lawyers. But it has made it harder to steamroll idiots with scholarly citations and fancy words.
Date: July 27th, 2026 8:23 PM Author: gunneratttt (gunneratttt)
Anyone that told you that AI can do that right now is a retard. But I don't think anyone ever did. What they did say is that it's a very powerful tool that functions exactly how you're describing ITT.