US law schools are adopting markedly different approaches to artificial intelligence as they endeavor to marry traditional legal pedagogy with a technology that is rapidly transforming the profession.
Some students returning to campus this fall have found laptops and phones banned from classrooms, while others are required to use AI in select courses. Over the summer, at least a dozen law schools introduced new or revised AI policies, covering permissible use of the technology and, in several cases, requiring course work in AI.
Schools Rethink Classroom Technology
The University of Georgia instituted an ‘analog classroom’ policy in August, imposing a default ban on devices during class. Students also must complete at least one AI-related technology course. Law dean Usha Rodrigues explained that the policy partly stemmed from instances of students consulting AI during traditional cold-calling exercises. “The Socratic method focuses on thinking on the spot, listening to colleagues and evaluating their answers critically,” she said.
The University of Chicago Law School became the first in July to ban laptops and phones in required first-year classes. The school states the policy aims to ensure students learn to think critically, strategically, and independently before using AI tools later in their studies.
Berkeley Takes Restrictive Approach
The University of California, Berkeley School of Law introduced a restrictive AI policy in May. Students are prohibited from using AI to brainstorm paper topics, summarize legal rules for papers, correct grammatical mistakes, or identify repetitive passages. The school also offers several AI courses. Its student-run AI at Berkeley Law club told Reuters that the default rules could conflict with the school’s technology focus. The group argued that legal education should teach students to differentiate between outsourcing legal reasoning and using AI within a legal workflow. Professor Colleen Chien, a member of Berkeley Law’s AI Leadership Committee, said faculty may depart from the default policy when it supports their teaching and learning goals.
Columbia, Michigan Take Different Paths
Columbia Law School’s August policy permits AI for testing arguments, seeking criticism, exploring alternative wording, and correcting spelling and grammar. However, written work must remain student-generated and reflect the student’s own intellectual creativity and judgment.
The University of Michigan allows AI for brainstorming and researching papers but prohibits its use for drafting, editing, or revising work.
The debate comes as law firms increasingly incorporate AI into legal practice. University of Texas law dean Bobby Chesney said employers now expect graduates to possess basic AI familiarity. For law schools, the challenge extends beyond technology. Lawyers face professional and ethical competency obligations, along with confidentiality requirements that affect how AI can be used.