Send a text

United States District Judge Allison Goddard of the Southern District of California joins Legal Regards for an in-depth discussion on AI use by the judiciary and how federal judges actually read and evaluate filings.

Judge Goddard discusses how and why she has incorporated AI tools into her chambers. She explains her use of tools such as Perplexity for research assistance and workflow efficiency, as well as broader tools being explored within the Ninth Circuit, including Westlaw AI, Lexis Protégé, VLex, and Learned Hand. The conversation addresses what these systems are designed to do, where they add value, and where judicial judgment must remain paramount.

Judge Goddard also describes how she has used AI to create internal research collections, including Social Security order databases built in tools such as NotebookLM, CoCounsel, and Lexis Vault. These collections allow her to prompt against her own prior orders to maintain consistency across fact-specific rulings. She explains how AI can assist in identifying recurring issues and patterns that are otherwise difficult to locate through traditional keyword searches, particularly in highly fact-dependent areas of law. At the same time, she draws a clear line between workflow assistance and substantive judicial interpretation.

The discussion explores her use of AI to draft limited portions of orders, particularly to summarize the parties’ arguments in a neutral and efficient manner. Rather than relying on lengthy block quotations, she explains how AI can help rephrase or synthesize arguments while preserving accuracy. She also addresses her concerns about using AI for judicial interpretation or doctrinal reasoning, emphasizing that constitutional adjudication and statutory construction require independent human judgment.

Judge Goddard explains why she is opposed to broad standing orders regulating AI use in her courtroom. She articulates her reasoning, including the view that existing professional responsibility rules and existing doctrines already provide tools to address misuse, and that rigid standing orders may be overinclusive or counterproductive.

The episode also includes practical guidance for attorneys. Judge Goddard offers concrete advice on how lawyers can avoid AI-related ethical missteps, including hallucinated citations, inaccurate factual assertions, and overreliance on automated summaries. She discusses how lawyers can responsibly use AI tools to enhance clarity, organization, and efficiency without compromising candor to the tribunal.

Finally, she addresses how she discusses AI use with law clerks and interns, including the guidance she provides her personnel. The conversation situates AI adoption within the broader judicial obligation to ensure fairness, transparency, and consistency.

Topics include
• Judicial discretion and decision-making
• Why Judge Goddard opposes standing orders on AI
• Use of Perplexity in chambers and research workflows
• AI tools being tested in the Ninth Circuit: Westlaw AI, Lexis Protégé, VLex, and Learned Hand
• Building Social Security order databases using NotebookLM, CoCounsel, and Lexis Vault
• Using AI to maintain consistency across fact-specific rulings
• Drafting assistance: summarizing arguments versus block quoting
• Ethical risks of generative AI and judicial interpretation concerns
• Guidance to clerks and interns on responsible AI use
• Practical advice for lawyers to avoid AI-related professional responsibility violations

Legal Regards is an official podcast of The National Law Review.

Send a text

Nebraska Attorney General Mike Hilgers joins Legal Regards to discuss how artificial intelligence is reshaping legal enforcement, regulatory strategy, and the evolving role of state attorneys general. The conversation centers on AI-related harms, responsible government use of AI tools, and the growing debate over whether AI regulation should be led by states, the federal government, or both.

Hilgers explains why he views AI as one of the most transformative technologies in modern history and outlines how his office is approaching AI adoption cautiously but deliberately. He discusses current exploratory uses of AI for internal productivity and analysis, the importance of protecting confidential investigative data, and why attorney general offices must move carefully before deploying AI in litigation workflows. He also addresses the ethical and professional risks associated with hallucinated citations and unreliable outputs, emphasizing that human oversight remains essential, particularly for court filings.

The discussion examines concrete AI-related harms and enforcement challenges. Hilgers describes Nebraska’s legislation addressing AI-generated child sexual abuse material, including the effort to close loopholes that could allow offenders to evade prosecution. He explains the constitutional reasoning supporting the law and situates AI enforcement within traditional state powers such as consumer protection and deceptive trade practices authority. He also outlines Nebraska’s current “wait and see” approach to broader AI-specific legislation while continuing to monitor technological developments and enforcement needs.

A central theme is federalism and preemption. Hilgers rejects a binary choice between federal and state regulation, arguing that states should retain authority over traditional enforcement areas like consumer protection and criminal law, while core model-level or system-wide regulatory frameworks may require national standards to avoid a fragmented patchwork that could hinder innovation and competitiveness. He also highlights the courts as a critical but often overlooked institution that can apply existing doctrines to AI disputes before sweeping new statutory schemes are enacted.

The conversation additionally covers the broader work of a state attorney general’s office and how AI fits within that landscape. Hilgers discusses multistate litigation, lawsuits involving large corporations such as TikTok and data breach cases, interstate disputes, constitutional challenges, and the expanding national influence of state AG offices. He also reflects on federal-state collaboration, marijuana policy debates, his path from private practice and legislative leadership to statewide office, and practical career advice for young lawyers and law students.

Topics include:

• AI as a transformative technology and emerging enforcement priority
• Government use of AI tools, safeguards, and professional responsibility risks
• AI-generated CSAM laws and constitutional enforcement considerations
• Consumer protection authority and traditional legal tools for AI harms
• Federal preemption, patchwork regulation risks, and national standards
• The role of courts and existing law in shaping AI governance
• Lawsuits against major corporations and multistate enforcement actions
• The modern responsibilities of a state attorney general
• Marijuana policy debates and federal rescheduling discussions
• Career guidance for young lawyers and public service pathways

A substantive discussion for lawyers, policymakers, and professionals interested in how state attorneys general are confronting AI-driven risks while managing the broader legal and constitutional responsibilities of their offices.

Legal Regar

Send a text

Missouri Attorney General Catherine Hanaway joins Legal Regards to discuss the evolving responsibilities of a state attorney general at a time of technological change, institutional scrutiny, and heightened public safety concerns. The conversation examines how state legal offices balance traditional enforcement priorities with emerging risks tied to artificial intelligence, digital fraud, and rapidly developing regulatory gaps.

Hanaway explains her office’s focus on reducing violent crime, protecting consumers from fraudulent Bitcoin ATM schemes, and enforcing state laws ranging from public integrity actions to online age-verification requirements. She also discusses the continuing effort to enforce Missouri’s multibillion-dollar COVID-related judgment against China and reflects on how continuity in government litigation is maintained despite leadership turnover.

The discussion explores the growing role of AI in legal practice, including how government lawyers are using AI tools to draft documents, accelerate research, and improve efficiency while maintaining strict human oversight and verification. Hanaway also offers her perspective on the proper balance between federal and state authority in regulating AI, noting both the traditional importance of state experimentation and the potential need for national standards in a globally competitive technological environment.

Listeners will also hear Hanaway reflect on leadership in public service, recruiting the next generation of trial lawyers, and navigating a career that has spanned federal prosecution, legislative leadership, BigLaw management, and statewide office.

Topics include:

• Violent crime reduction as a statewide enforcement priority
• Consumer protection and fraud risks involving Bitcoin ATMs
• Enforcement of Missouri’s COVID-related judgment against China
• Public integrity actions and removing corrupt officials
• Practical uses of AI in government legal work
• Verification, ethics, and safeguards when lawyers use AI tools
• Federal versus state authority in regulating artificial intelligence
• Recruiting and training trial-ready government lawyers

A substantive discussion for lawyers, policymakers, and professionals seeking insight into how state attorneys general are adapting legal institutions to meet modern technological and enforcement challenges.

Legal Regards is an official podcast of The National Law Review.