Technologies

AI as Lawyer: It’s Starting as a Stunt, but There’s a Real Need

People already have a hard enough time getting help from lawyers. Advocates say AI could change that.

Next month, AI will enter the courtroom, and the US legal system may never be the same.

An artificial intelligence chatbot, technology programmed to respond to questions and hold a conversation, is expected to advise two individuals fighting speeding tickets in courtrooms in undisclosed cities. The two will wear a wireless headphone, which will relay what the judge says to the chatbot being run by DoNotPay, a company that typically helps people fight traffic tickets through the mail. The headphone will then play the chatbot’s suggested responses to the judge’s questions, which the individuals can then choose to repeat in court.

It’s a stunt. But it also has the potential to change how people interact with the law, and to bring many more changes over time. DoNotPay CEO Josh Browder says expensive legal fees have historically kept people from hiring traditional lawyers to fight for them in traffic court, which typically involves fines that can reach into the hundreds of dollars.

So, his team wondered whether an AI chatbot, trained to understand and argue the law, could intervene.

«Most people can’t afford legal representation,» Browder said in an interview. Using the AI in a real court situation «will be a proof of concept for courts to allow technology in the courtroom.»

Regardless of whether Browder is successful — he says he will be — his company’s actions mark the first of what are likely to be many more efforts to bring AI further into our daily lives.

Modern life is already filled with the technology. Some people wake up to a song chosen by AI-powered alarms. Their news feed is often curated by a computer program, too, one that’s taught to pick items they’ll find most interesting or that they’ll be most likely to comment on and share via social media. AI chooses what photos to show us on our phones, it asks us if it should add a meeting to our calendars based on emails we receive, and it reminds us to text a birthday greeting to our loved ones.

But advocates say AI’s ability to sort information, spot patterns and quickly pull up data means that in a short time, it could become a «copilot» for our daily lives. Already, coders on Microsoft-owned GitHub are using AI to help them create apps and solve technical problems. Social media managers are relying on AI to help determine the best time to post a new item. Even we here at CNET are experimenting with whether AI can help write explainer-type stories about the ever-changing world of finance.

So, it can seem like only a matter of time before AI finds its way into research-heavy industries like the law as well. And considering that 80% of low-income Americans don’t have access to legal help, while 40% to 60% of the middle class still struggle to get such assistance, there’s clearly demand. AI could help meet that need, but lawyers shouldn’t feel like new technology is going to take business away from them, says Andrew Perlman, dean of the law school at Suffolk University. It’s simply a matter of scale.

«There is no way that the legal profession is going to be able to deliver all of the legal services that people need,» Perlman said.

Turning to AI

DoNotPay began its latest AI experiment back in 2021 when businesses were given early access to GPT-3, the same AI tool used by the startup OpenAI to create ChatGPT, which went viral for its ability to answer questions, write essays and even create new computer programs. In December, Browder pitched his idea via a tweet: have someone wear an Apple AirPod into traffic court so that the AI could hear what’s happening through the microphone and feed responses through the earbud.

Aside from people jeering him for the stunt, Browder knew he’d have other challenges. Many states and districts limit legal advisors to those who are licensed to practice law, a clear hurdle that UC Irvine School of Law professor Emily Taylor Poppe said may cause trouble for DoNotPay’s AI.

«Because the AI would be providing information in real time, and because it would involve applying relevant law to specific facts, it is hard to see how it could avoid being seen as the provision of legal advice,» Poppe said. Essentially, the AI would be legally considered a lawyer acting without a law license.

AI tools raise privacy concerns too. The computer program technically needs to record audio to interpret what it hears, a move that’s not allowed in many courts. Lawyers are also expected to follow ethics rules that forbid them from sharing confidential information about clients. Can a chatbot, designed to share information, follow the same protocols?

Perlman says many of these concerns can be answered if these tools are created with care. If successful, he argues, these technologies could also help with the mountains of paperwork lawyers encounter on a daily basis.

Ultimately, he argues, chatbots may turn out to be as helpful as Google and other research tools are today, saving lawyers from having to physically wade through law libraries to find information stored on bookshelves.

«Lawyers trying to deliver legal services without technology are going to be inadequate and insufficient to meeting the public’s legalities,» Perlman said. Ultimately, he believes, AI can do more good than harm.

The two cases DoNotPay participates in will likely impact much of that conversation. Browder declined to say where the proceedings will take place, citing safety concerns.

Neither DoNotPay nor the defendants plan to inform the judges or anyone in court that an AI is being used or that audio is being recorded, a fact that raises ethics concerns. This in itself resulted in pushback on Twitter when Browder asked for traffic ticket volunteers in December. But Browder says the courts that DoNotPay chose are likely to be more lenient if they find out.

The future of law

After these traffic ticket fights, DoNotPay plans to create a video presentation designed to advocate in favor of the technology, ultimately with the goal of changing law and policy to allow AI in courtrooms.

States and legal organizations, meanwhile, are already debating these questions. In 2020, a California task force dedicated to exploring ways to expand access to legal services recommended allowing select unlicensed practitioners to represent clients, among other reforms. The American Bar Association told judges using AI tools to be mindful of biases instilled in the tools themselves. UNESCO, the international organization dedicated to preserving culture, has a free online course covering the basics of what AI can offer legal systems.

For his part, Browder says AI chatbots will become so popular in the next couple of years that the courts will have no choice but to allow them anyway. Perhaps AI tools will have a seat at the table, rather than having to whisper in our ears.

«Six months ago, you couldn’t even imagine that an AI could respond in these detailed ways,» Browder said. «No one has imagined, in any law, what this could be like in real life.»

Technologies

Wisconsin Reverses Decision to Ban VPNs in Age-Verification Bill

The law would have required websites to block VPN users from accessing «harmful material.»

Following a wave of criticism, Wisconsin lawmakers have decided not to include a ban on VPN services in their age-verification law, making its way through the state legislature.

Wisconsin Senate Bill 130 (and its sister Assembly Bill 105), introduced in March 2025, aims to prohibit businesses from «publishing or distributing material harmful to minors» unless there is a reasonable «method to verify the age of individuals attempting to access the website.»

One provision would have required businesses to bar people from accessing their sites via «a virtual private network system or virtual private network provider.»

A VPN lets you access the internet via an encrypted connection, enabling you to bypass firewalls and unblock geographically restricted websites and streaming content. While using a VPN, your IP address and physical location are masked, and your internet service provider doesn’t know which websites you visit.

Wisconsin state Sen. Van Wanggaard moved to delete that provision in the legislation, thereby releasing VPNs from any liability. The state assembly agreed to remove the VPN ban, and the bill now awaits Wisconsin Governor Tony Evers’s signature.

Rindala Alajaji, associate director of state affairs at the digital freedom nonprofit Electronic Frontier Foundation, says Wisconsin’s U-turn is «great news.»

«This shows the power of public advocacy and pushback,» Alajaji says. «Politicians heard the VPN users who shared their worries and fears, and the experts who explained how the ban wouldn’t work.»

Earlier this week, the EFF had written an open letter arguing that the draft laws did not «meaningfully advance the goal of keeping young people safe online.» The EFF said that blocking VPNs would harm many groups that rely on that software for private and secure internet connections, including «businesses, universities, journalists and ordinary citizens,» and that «many law enforcement professionals, veterans and small business owners rely on VPNs to safely use the internet.»

VPNs can also help you get around age-verification laws — for instance, if you live in a state or country that requires age verification to access certain material, you can use a VPN to make it look like you live elsewhere, thereby gaining access to that material. As age-restriction laws increase around the US, VPN use has also increased. However, many people are using free VPNs, which are fertile ground for cybercriminals.

In its letter to Wisconsin lawmakers prior to the reversal, the EFF argued that it is «unworkable» to require websites to block VPN users from accessing adult content. The EFF said such sites cannot «reliably determine» where a VPN customer lives — it could be any US state or even other countries.

«As a result, covered websites would face an impossible choice: either block all VPN users everywhere, disrupting access for millions of people nationwide, or cease offering services in Wisconsin altogether,» the EFF wrote.

Wisconsin is not the only state to consider VPN bans to prevent access to adult material. Last year, Michigan introduced the Anticorruption of Public Morals Act, which would ban all use of VPNs. If passed, it would force ISPs to detect and block VPN usage and also ban the sale of VPNs in the state. Fines could reach $500,000.

Technologies

Today’s NYT Strands Hints, Answers and Help for Feb. 21 #720

Here are hints and answers for the NYT Strands puzzle for Feb. 21, No. 720.

Looking for the most recent Strands answer? Click here for our daily Strands hints, as well as our daily answers and hints for The New York Times Mini Crossword, Wordle, Connections and Connections: Sports Edition puzzles.

Today’s NYT Strands puzzle might be easy for those who pursue a certain hobby. Some of the answers are difficult to unscramble, so if you need hints and answers, read on.

I go into depth about the rules for Strands in this story.

If you’re looking for today’s Wordle, Connections and Mini Crossword answers, you can visit CNET’s NYT puzzle hints page.

Read more: NYT Connections Turns 1: These Are the 5 Toughest Puzzles So Far

Hint for today’s Strands puzzle

Today’s Strands theme is: The beer necessities.

If that doesn’t help you, here’s a clue: Cheers!

Clue words to unlock in-game hints

Your goal is to find hidden words that fit the puzzle’s theme. If you’re stuck, find any words you can. Every time you find three words of four letters or more, Strands will reveal one of the theme words. These are the words I used to get those hints but any words of four or more letters that you find will work:

MALE, TREAT, STEAM, TEAM, MOVE, LOVE, ROVE, ROVER, SPEAR, PEAR

Answers for today’s Strands puzzle

These are the answers that tie into the theme. The goal of the puzzle is to find them all, including the spangram, a theme word that reaches from one side of the puzzle to the other. When you have all of them (I originally thought there were always eight but learned that the number can vary), every letter on the board will be used. Here are the nonspangram answers:

HOPS, WATER, MALT, YEAST, BARLEY, SUGAR, WHEAT, FLAVOR

Today’s Strands spangram

Today’s Strands spangram is HOMEBREW. To find it, start with the H that’s three letters to the right on the top row, and wind down.

Technologies

Today’s NYT Connections Hints, Answers and Help for Feb. 21, #986

Here are some hints and the answers for the NYT Connections puzzle for Feb. 21 #986.

Looking for the most recent Connections answers? Click here for today’s Connections hints, as well as our daily answers and hints for The New York Times Mini Crossword, Wordle, Connections: Sports Edition and Strands puzzles.

Today’s NYT Connections puzzle features another of those purple categories where you need to look for hidden words inside of other words. It can be a real stumper. Read on for clues and today’s Connections answers.

The Times has a Connections Bot, like the one for Wordle. Go there after you play to receive a numeric score and to have the program analyze your answers. Players who are registered with the Times Games section can now nerd out by following their progress, including the number of puzzles completed, win rate, number of times they nabbed a perfect score and their win streak.

Read more: Hints, Tips and Strategies to Help You Win at NYT Connections Every Time

Hints for today’s Connections groups

Here are four hints for the groupings in today’s Connections puzzle, ranked from the easiest yellow group to the tough (and sometimes bizarre) purple group.

Yellow group hint: Rookies don’t have this.

Green group hint: Call the roll.

Blue group hint: How’d you do today?

Purple group hint: Vroom-vroom, but with a twist.