California weighs mandate for AI legal training

1 min read

California is considering a requirement for law schools to incorporate artificial intelligence training into their curricula, reflecting the growing influence of the technology across legal practice.

The State Bar of California’s Committee of Bar Examiners has proposed adding instruction on the competent use, capabilities and limitations of artificial intelligence to the six credits of practice-based competency training required for juris doctor students. The change, which could be formally pursued as early as next month, would apply to the state’s 25 accredited and unaccredited law schools overseen by the state bar, but not to those accredited by the American Bar Association.

The proposal would also extend to professional responsibility courses, integrating artificial intelligence into ethical and practical legal education. California appears to be the first jurisdiction to consider such a mandate, as the American Bar Association currently has no pending proposals to include artificial intelligence in its accreditation requirements. Nonetheless, a growing number of law schools have already introduced elective or required training in response to student demand and the technology’s rapid adoption within the profession.

Artificial intelligence is increasingly used to accelerate legal work, contributing to the rise of specialised technology firms while altering traditional workflows. At the same time, its limitations have become more visible, with courts sanctioning attorneys for submitting inaccurate materials generated by such tools. These developments have heightened scrutiny around how future lawyers are trained to use the technology responsibly.

A recent poll by the state bar found that a strong majority of deans support training students in artificial intelligence, though fewer favour making it compulsory. More than half indicated their current programmes already provide adequate preparation, underscoring ongoing debate about how far formal requirements should go in adapting legal education to technological change.

Legal Insider