Judges citing fake AI-made law face few consequences

Judges in at least eight US cases have issued orders that cite fake law made up by AI, and almost none have faced any penalty. That is the argument of an opinion column by an adjunct law professor published by Bloomberg Law on October 20, 2026. It matters because these errors are now showing up in rulings themselves, not just in lawyers' filings.

What happened

The column in Bloomberg Law counts at least eight US cases where a judge's order or opinion cited legal sources invented by AI. The cases include constitutional rights disputes, a securities case and a murder case.

In two federal cases from 2025, judges in Mississippi and New Jersey had orders with errors that were later withdrawn, per FedScoop. In October 2025, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee released letters from both judges. The letters said a law clerk had used Perplexity and an assistant had used ChatGPT, FedScoop reported. The column calls that assistant an intern. Neither judge was punished, the column says.

Key facts

• Cases counted: At least eight US cases with judges' orders citing AI-made sources, per the Bloomberg Law column.
• Few appeals: Only about 12% of cases are appealed, by an estimate the column cites, so many bad orders may never get checked, per the Bloomberg Law column.
• Murder case: In Georgia, a trial court turned down a new-trial request from a defendant serving a life sentence for murder using an order that cited cases that do not exist. The Georgia Supreme Court threw out that order. The prosecutor admitted misusing AI and was suspended from practice there for six months. The trial judge faced no penalty, per the Bloomberg Law column.
• Judges using AI: A Northwestern study, cited in the Bloomberg Law column, found over 60% of surveyed federal judges use at least one AI tool. 45.5% of surveyed judges said court leaders had not given them AI training, and 15.7% were unsure.
• People without lawyers: Nearly 30% of federal civil cases filed in 2025 involved people with no lawyer, per the Bloomberg Law column.

Background

The Mississippi order was put on the court record in July 2025, per FedScoop. Both orders had errors such as misquotes and parties who were not in the case, FedScoop reported. The New Jersey ruling came in a multi-million-dollar securities case, the column says.

The Mississippi judge said a draft was put on the court record before standard review. The New Jersey judge said an intern used ChatGPT without permission, and that chambers now have a written policy banning generative AI for legal research and drafting, per FedScoop. The Mississippi chambers now require a second clerk to review drafts and attach printed copies of every cited case, per FedScoop. The Senate committee chairman praised their honesty but said courts need "more decisive, meaningful and permanent AI policies," FedScoop reported.

What it means for you

Our take: a court ruling can change someone's freedom, money or family. If a judge leans on a made-up case, the person on the losing side may never know, especially without a lawyer to check.

The column argues that if courts don't act, state lawmakers and Congress should require disclosure of AI use, checks on citations and real consequences, according to Bloomberg Law.

Our take: AI tools are useful, but anything they cite must be checked against the real source. That goes for judges, lawyers and anyone using a chatbot for advice.

What happens next

The column says a federal appeals court, the Fifth Circuit, is considering reassigning one of these cases, per Bloomberg Law. No decision date is given.

FAQ

Have judges really cited fake AI-made cases?

Yes. A Bloomberg Law column counts at least eight US cases where a judge's order cited sources invented by AI. In two 2025 federal cases, judges said staff had used Perplexity and ChatGPT, per FedScoop.

Were the judges punished?

The Bloomberg Law column says the public record shows no evidence that the judges in the Mississippi, New Jersey and Georgia cases were disciplined. In the Georgia murder case, the prosecutor who brought in the fake citations was suspended from practice for six months, but the trial judge was not.

How common is AI use by judges?

A Northwestern study found over 60% of surveyed federal judges use at least one AI tool, according to Bloomberg Law.

Sources

• Bloomberg Law
• fedscoop.com