As artificial intelligence (AI) transforms the justice system, AI in the courts is redefining how judges, attorneys, and litigants engage with the law. Around the world, courts are adopting new tools to improve efficiency, transparency, and access. Yet, these advances pose a critical challenge: ensuring that innovation enhances fairness without diminishing the human judgment that is the essence of justice.
A New Era: AI in the Courts and Judicial Innovation
The global justice community is moving steadily toward modernization. Courts throughout the world now rely on AI-powered transcription, document review, and scheduling systems. Some jurisdictions use AI-driven tools to assist in identifying case backlogs, predicting caseload trends, and matching defendants to diversion or treatment programs.[1]
By integrating AI, courts can reduce delays, manage data more effectively, and improve public accessibility. Routine administrative tasks once consuming hours of staff time can now be completed in seconds.[2] For judges, this can mean more time devoted to better decision making, the core of judicial work.
Yet technological progress is not without tension. Courts must ensure that efficiency never comes at the expense of fairness, and that data-driven tools do not overshadow human judgment[3] The central ethical question remains: how can AI assist judges without replacing their authority or compromising the legitimacy of their decisions?
Expanding Access to Justice Through Technology
AI tools are transforming how individuals engage with the justice system These technologies now assist self-represented litigants by providing essential legal information, guiding them through complex procedures, clarifying filing requirements, and even helping to draft and complete court forms.[4] By automating routine guidance, these tools help bridge the gap for those who cannot afford legal counsel, reducing procedural errors and delays that often disadvantage unrepresented parties.
At the same time, Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) platforms are transforming how routine cases, such as small claims, landlord-tenant disputes, and traffic violations, are handled.[5] Using technology to facilitate communication, negotiation, and mediation between parties, ODR systems allow disputes to be resolved entirely online, without requiring in-person court appearances.[6] This can result in a process that is more accessible, particularly for individuals in rural areas, those with mobility challenges, or those unable to take time away from work.[7]
For example, British Columbia’s Civil Resolution Tribunal[8], Singapore’s Community Justice[9] and Tribunals System, and China’s Internet Courts[10] allow litigants to file, mediate, and resolve cases digitally. These platforms rely on AI to assist clerks and mediators, match cases to appropriate procedures, and analyze resolution data to improve outcomes.
Such systems make justice more affordable and accessible for litigants. However, access must not be confused with equality. Digital tools can widen disparities for those without reliable internet access, digital literacy, or trust in technology. To ensure that justice remains truly accessible, courts must pair innovation with outreach, education, and safeguards that protect vulnerable populations.
AI in the Courts: Ethical and Regulatory Challenges
As courts adopt AI, they also confront new ethical and regulatory responsibilities.[11] Transparency, accountability, and data privacy must remain non-negotiable. The National Center for State Courts (NCSC) advises that judges and court administrators maintain “technology competence”, not only understanding what AI can do but also recognizing its limits and risks.[12]
Globally, governments are developing frameworks to ensure the ethical use of artificial intelligence in justice systems. The European Union’s Artificial Intelligence Act classifies AI systems used in law enforcement and judicial contexts as “high risk,” mandating rigorous testing, transparency, and continuous human oversight.[13] Singapore’s Model AI Governance Framework emphasizes accountability and data protection while fostering innovation and responsible deployment[14]. Taken together, these initiatives—along with the efforts of the Council of Europe and the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), which have issued ethical guidelines highlighting proportionality, fairness, and human rights—reflect a growing international consensus that AI in the judiciary must be transparent, accountable, and firmly under human control.[15]
These developments reveal a shared understanding: the rule of law must guide technology, not the other way around. Courts that implement AI must do so with clear rules of transparency, auditing, and appeal. The ability to explain how an AI system reaches its conclusions is essential to preserving due process and public trust.
Global Trends and the Path Forward
Around the world, judicial leaders are recognizing that the future of courts depends on embedding this technology within a framework of fairness, ethics, and accessibility. The future court will likely be hybrid: digital in efficiency, human in judgement. Hearings may take place in virtual rooms, filings may be automated, and judgments may rely on AI-assisted research. Even as the integration of AI into the world’s justice systems evolves, its guiding principle must remain unchanged: technology should serve justice—never define it.
Other Articles in this Series
Introduction: Artificial Intelligence and the Courts: A Blog Series from Justice Speakers Institute
Part 1: AI in the Courtroom: Opportunities and Risks
Part 2: AI in the Courts: Ethical Challenges
Part 3: AI on Trial – Admissibility of AI-Generated Evidence
Part 4: Judicial Decision-Making: Transparency, Accountability, and the Judicial Role
Part 5: Courts of the Future-Innovation, Access, and Global Trends
Part 6: Judging the Machine–Lessons, Guardrails, and the Path Forward
Citations
[1] Christophe Dubois, From Case Law to Code: Evaluating AI’s Role in the Justice System, Montreal AI Ethics Institute(May 24, 2023).
[2] Conference of State Court Administrators, The Role of Artificial Intelligence in the Courts 3–5 (Nat’l Ctr. for State Cts. 2024).
[3] Hon. Brian MacKenzie (Ret.), AI in Judicial Decision-Making: Transparency, Ethics, and the Human Role, Justice Speakers Institute (Oct. 21, 2025).
[4] Maura R. Grossman, Paul W. Grimm & Cary Coglianese, How to Harness AI for Justice, Judicature, Vol. 108, No. 1 (2024).
[5] Id.
[6] Id.
[7] Id.
[8] Colin Rule & Shannon Salter, The Online Justice Experience in British Columbia, Soc’y for Computers & Law (May 2019).
[9] Judiciary of the Republic of Singapore, Community Justice and Tribunals System (CJTS), Singapore Judiciary (n.d.).
[10] Jinting Deng & Mimi Zou, China’s E-Justice Revolution: Internet Courts and the Future of Administrative Justice, Judicature (Aug. 2021).
[11] Hon. Brian MacKenzie (Ret.), AI in the Courts: Ethical Challenges, Justice Speakers Institute (Sept. 30, 2025).
[12] Conference of State Court Administrators, Supra Note 2
[13] European Commission, Regulatory Framework Proposal on Artificial Intelligence, Digital Strategy (Apr. 21, 2021).
[14] Personal Data Protection Commission, Model Artificial Intelligence Governance Framework, Version 2 (Gov’t of Sing. 2020).
[15] European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ), European Ethical Charter on the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Judicial Systems and Their Environment (Council of Eur. 2018).
INTERESTED IN AI AND THE COURTS?
Artificial Intelligence is transforming justice. But it also raises complex questions of ethics, fairness and accountability. At the Justice Speakers Institute (JSI), we provide training, consulting, and expert presentations to help courts, policymakers, and legal professionals navigate these challenges responsibly.
Contact us today to learn how JSI can support your organization in understanding and implementing AI in the courts.
Get more articles like this
in your inbox
Subscribe to our mailing list and get the latest information and updates to your email inbox.
Thank you for subscribing.
Something went wrong.
