Visible to the Court: How AI Is (and Isn't) Litigated in U.S. Federal Court Opinions
A systematic review of 559 U.S. federal court opinions involving AI reveals that litigation centers on a limited set of dispute areas, technology types, and litigant categories. The study finds that courts predominantly apply existing legal doctrines rather than developing new AI-specific legal frameworks, resulting in fragmented governance. Notably, there are significant gaps between AI-related harms documented in incident databases and those addressed in court.
Why it matters: This work highlights that current U.S. federal litigation addresses only a subset of AI-related risks, underscoring limitations in the legal system's ability to respond to emerging AI harms.
Full story at: arXiv Computers and Society ↗