AI Enters the Courtroom: May 2026 Industry Roundup
Federal judges weigh the risks, governments pilot AI transcription, and courts test generative tools. Our rank-ordered read on the AI-in-courts stories that matter for the court community this edition.
Alicia Moffatt
· 5 min read
Artificial intelligence moved from the conference panel to the courtroom this period. Judges are setting ground rules, governments are piloting AI transcription, and academic institutions are staking out leadership in legal AI. TheRecordXchange® tracks this coverage so the court community does not have to. Below are the stories worth your time this edition, rank-ordered by how directly they affect courts and by the authority of the source.
The three to read first
JD Journal
Federal Judges Split on AI in Courts as Use Grows and Errors Mount
Federal judges are divided as AI use in the courtroom rises and documented errors accumulate alongside it. The piece lays out where judges see legitimate efficiency gains and where they see unacceptable risk to the integrity of the record. For courts weighing their own AI policies, it is a clear-eyed look at the questions the judiciary is actively debating.
The Justice Gap
Government plans to use AI to make court transcripts
A government proposal to use AI for producing court transcripts signals how seriously public institutions now take automated speech-to-text in legal settings. The article examines the accuracy, oversight, and accountability questions that surface when the official record is generated by machine. This sits at the center of the work TRX does every day.
Michigan News Source
ChatGPT Justice? Courts Tiptoe Into the AI Era With Former Michigan Supreme Court Judge Leading the Way
A former Michigan Supreme Court justice is helping courts take their first careful steps into generative AI. The report shows what cautious, judge-led adoption looks like in practice rather than in theory. It is a useful counterpoint to the headlines that treat AI in courts as either inevitable or impossible.
By featuring a former Michigan Supreme Court justice
More from this edition
MSN News
A sitting Supreme Court justice argues that AI in the judiciary must keep humans at the center of decision-making, a theme echoing across courts worldwide.
LawNext
A balanced look at how a leading AI assistant could expand access to justice, where it falls short today, and what remains genuinely uncertain.
New York Post
An argument for keeping skilled human reviewers in the transcription loop, even as automation handles more of the first pass.
By Ben Walker
Cornell Law School
New partnerships position Cornell Law to deepen its research and teaching in legal AI, a signal of where academic investment is heading.
Judge Schlegel (Substack)
A sitting judge explains the emerging model-context-protocol tooling and the mismatch between fast-moving AI capability and slower-moving court practice.
By Judge Schlegel
Harvey
Two legal-AI vendors join forces to give AI agents access to institutional knowledge, a sign of how the legal technology market is consolidating around agents.
Why we publish this
TRX serves the court community, and part of that service is helping you stay oriented as AI reshapes the record. We read widely, rank by relevance and source authority, and pass along what is worth your attention. This roundup is curated and published roughly every two weeks. If you have a story we should consider for the next edition, send it our way.