This tag are for posts that relate to the general discussion or courses for ai-assisted-lawyering.
AI-use disclosure can help readers understand how AI shaped the work, but it cannot do the work for the writer. Someone still has to verify the facts, exercise judgment, protect confidential information, and stand behind the final result.
A useful AI-Use Disclosure should not say everything, and it should not say nothing. It should say enough to help the audience understand what AI did, whether that use affects trust or reliance, and who remains responsible for the final product.
AI-use disclosure should not turn on whether AI touched the work in some way. That question is too broad to be useful. The better question is what AI did. Did it help brainstorm? Edit? Draft? Analyze? Create media? Influence a decision? Those uses sit on a spectrum, and they do not all require the same kind of disclosure.
Pope Leo XIV’s Magnifica Humanitas does not tell law schools to fear AI or worship it. It asks a better question: what kind of people are our technologies forming? For legal education, that means teaching students to use AI while protecting the slow human work that builds judgment, responsibility, and professional identity.
AI disclosure sounds simple until you ask what “AI use” actually means. Is brainstorming the same as drafting? Is editing the same as analysis? This post starts a series on why the goal should not be maximum disclosure, but meaningful disclosure that helps people understand what AI did, who reviewed it, and why it matters.
I’ve centered this post on a video where I tackle the ultimate paradox for law students: AI can double your learning gains, but it can also end your career before it starts. I dive into a concept I call “cognitive outsourcing”—the temptation to hand off hard mental work to a machine just because the output looks polished. Watch the full breakdown to see why “automation bias” is a silent killer and how to implement a four-step workflow that builds your legal judgment instead of replacing it. It’s about augmenting your intelligence, not outsourcing your brain.
This guide is about how to use AI in law school without letting it do the thinking for you. AI can make work feel easier and more finished than it really is. That’s useful in some moments and risky in others, especially when you’re still learning how to exercise legal judgment. The goal isn’t to avoid these tools. It’s to use them in a way that actually helps you become a better lawyer. Download the free guide to learn more.
The Classroom is where Trudeau.ai stops thinking out loud and start helping you learn. This is a space for learning skills like clear writing, AI-assisted thinking, and professional judgment in a world where tools are powerful and human decisions still matter.
The Conversation is where I think in public on Trudeau.ai. This introductory post explains what you’ll find here: evolving ideas about law, AI, clarity, and human judgment—shared openly, thoughtfully, and without pretending to have final answers in a rapidly changing world.
