AI in the courtroom

Part One: AI in the Courtroom: Opportunities and Risks

Artificial intelligence is transforming the courtroom, reshaping legal research, case management, and access to justice. While AI offers efficiency and consistency, it also raises concerns about bias, transparency, and fairness. Courts now face the challenge of balancing innovation with accountability to preserve the integrity of justice.
Tagged under: , , , ,

Artificial Intelligence and the Courts: A Blog Series from Justice Speakers Institute

Artificial intelligence is transforming the justice system, from risk assessments to drafting opinions. JSI’s six-part series, AI and the Courts: Balancing Justice in a Digital Age, explores opportunities, risks, and ethical challenges. The series highlights how courts can ensure AI strengthens fairness, accountability, and public trust in justice.
Tagged under: , , , ,
Opioid Intervention Court

Opioid Intervention Courts: A Proven Path to Recovery

Opioid Intervention Courts offer a life-saving alternative to traditional justice responses by focusing on rapid treatment, overdose prevention, and recovery support. Backed by recent research, this evidence-based model prioritizes health over punishment and helps courts address opioid use disorder more effectively and compassionately.
Tagged under: , , , ,
Judicial Leadership

Judicial Leadership in Problem-Solving Courts: The Key to Success Worldwide

Problem-solving courts offer a transformative approach to justice, focusing on rehabilitation instead of punishment. Research from the U.S. and U.K. shows that strong judicial leadership is essential to these courts’ success, fostering trust, improving outcomes, and breaking cycles of addiction and crime through procedural fairness and participant engagement.
Tagged under: , , , ,
Therapeutic justice

Therapeutic Justice: Enhancing the Judge’s Role

Therapeutic justice redefines the judge’s role from neutral arbiter to active facilitator of change. This approach promotes individualized justice, community collaboration, and systemic reform through problem-solving courts. By embracing these principles, judges help transform lives while strengthening public confidence in the court system.
Tagged under: , , , ,
MOUD in the justice system

Overcoming Barriers to MOUD in the Justice System

Court-involved individuals with opioid use disorder face serious barriers to accessing lifesaving medications. This blog examines the research behind these challenges—such as stigma, provider bias, cost, and restrictive policies—and outlines actionable reforms to improve access to MOUD in court and probation settings.
Tagged under: , , ,
Treatment Courts for OUD

How Treatment Courts Can Transform OUD Recovery

The opioid crisis has had a profound impact on the criminal justice system, with many individuals struggling with opioid use disorder (OUD) coming into frequent contact with police, courts, and jails. Despite the well-documented effectiveness of Medications for Opioid Use Disorder (MOUD), treatment gaps persist within the justice system. A recent study of high-overdose county
Tagged under: ,
Veteran Treatment Court Mentors

Ethical Boundaries for Veteran Treatment Court Mentors

The Role of a Mentor in VTCs At its core, a Veteran Treatment Court (VTC) mentor serves as a trusted peer and supporter of veteran participants (mentors), guiding them through the court process and connecting them with the necessary resources. Their primary obligations include engaging with and encouraging mentees, assisting them in resolving personal or
Trauma-Informed Justice

Trauma-Informed Justice: Enhancing Procedural Fairness in the Courtroom

The connection between trauma-informed justice practices and procedural fairness is profound. By adhering to the principles of procedural fairness, courts can create an environment where individuals feel safe, heard, and supported. Judges must recognize that trauma is often invisible and can affect how litigants engage with the legal system. People with trauma histories may react
Tagged under: , ,
admissibility of scientific evidence

Understanding the Admissibility of Scientific Evidence in Court

Have you ever heard of the “Daubert/Frye” test? The apparent merging of the Frye and Daubert standards reflects a certain confusion that exists on the appropriate legal standard for the admissibility of scientific evidence, particularly in criminal cases. While the standard for the admission of scientific evidence can vary widely from federal courts to state courts and from state to
  • Published in Law