AI is flooding the courts with more cases, more filings, and more fake citations

AI use is becoming pervasive across the legal system, with both experienced staff and absolute novices turning to ChatGPT and other tools to try to make the most persuasive case possible when they arrive in court, even if some of those claims turn out to be literally too good to be true. Last month, top law firm Sullivan & Cromwell was forced to apologize for filing fictitious case names and fabricated quotes in a legal document submitted in a case, as well as citing incorrect statutes in the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. “We deeply regret this occurred,” the firm wrote in an apologetic letter to the judge in a case about an alleged scam operation run out of Cambodia, which the defendant denies. It’s far from the only legal hitch blamed on AI. A 2025 High Court case in the U.K. saw a barrister submit 18 fictitious case-law citations out of 45 total. In another 2025 disciplinary case, a barrister used AI to prepare for a hearing and attempted to mask fabricated citations, while the widely publi