Dear Alumni and Friends:
Few developments in recent years have generated as much certainty—and as much disagreement—as the rise of artificial intelligence. There is broad consensus that AI will transform the practice of law. There is far less agreement about what that transformation will look like, how quickly it will unfold, or what it will demand of lawyers and the institutions that prepare them.
What is clear is this: the future of law will not be defined simply by whether we use these technologies, but by how we use them—how thoughtfully, how responsibly, and how firmly we insist on preserving the human judgment at the core of legal practice.
This issue of the Cornell LawForum explores that challenge from multiple perspectives. We begin with the Law School’s new Center for Law and AI, a cross-disciplinary initiative designed to bring together faculty, students, and collaborators from across Cornell to grapple with one of the most consequential developments facing the legal profession. The Center reflects a simple but powerful premise: that law schools should not wait for the contours of AI to settle before engaging with it, but instead should help define the terms of that engagement.
A second feature highlights the breadth of faculty research in this rapidly evolving area. Cornell scholars are examining how AI might reshape judicial decision-making, influence democratic institutions, and challenge existing frameworks for regulation and accountability. Others are using AI itself as a tool to study the law, uncovering patterns in legal texts and opening new avenues for empirical research. Together, this work reflects a recognition that AI is not simply a technological development, but a legal and social one—raising questions about fairness, transparency, and the appropriate limits of automation in domains where human consequences are profound.
A third feature examines how these developments are transforming legal education. Preparing students for a world in which AI is ubiquitous requires more than technical familiarity with emerging tools. It requires cultivating the ability to evaluate those tools critically—to understand their capabilities and their limitations, and to integrate them into legal work without outsourcing judgment. Across the curriculum, students are engaging directly with
leading-edge AI platforms, testing their outputs, and learning to approach them with both curiosity and skepticism. The goal is not to produce lawyers who rely on technology uncritically, but lawyers who can use it effec-tively because they understand it deeply.
We then turn to the ways in which AI is already reshaping legal practice. Tasks that once required hours of careful review—drafting contracts, analyzing documents, conducting research—can now be completed in a fraction of the time. Law firms and organizations are investing heavily in these tools, seeking efficiencies and new ways to serve clients. At the same time, the risks are equally apparent. AI systems can produce answers that appear authoritative but are incomplete, misleading, or simply wrong. As a result, the lawyer’s role is not diminished but reframed: to oversee, to question, and ultimately to take responsibility for the work product delivered to clients and courts.
Complementing these features, a faculty essay by David Reiss, clinical professor of law and research director of the Blassberg-Rice Center for Entrepreneurship Law, explores how AI tools can be integrated into legal training and practice in ways that enhance, rather than replace, professional judgment. Drawing on classroom experience, the essay underscores both the promise of these tools and the discipline required to use them responsibly.
What emerges from these perspectives is not a single answer, but a set of guiding principles. AI can enhance legal practice, but it cannot replace the responsibility that lawyers bear to their clients and to the justice system. It can increase efficiency, but it also requires vigilance. It can expand access to legal tools and information, but only if deployed with careful attention to equity and accountability. In each case, the technology’s value depends on the judgment of those who use it.
Cornell Law’s approach is grounded in this understanding. By bringing together expertise from law, computer science, information science, and public policy, the Law School is building a framework for engaging with AI that is both rigorous and practical.
Moments of rapid technological change create both uncertainty and opportunity, challenging long-standing assumptions while inviting new forms of collaboration and innovation. For the legal profession, the stakes are especially high: the law orders society, resolves disputes, and safeguards rights. Ensuring that it evolves thoughtfully in response to AI is a responsibility that extends across generations of lawyers.
We are grateful to the many members of the Cornell Law community—faculty, students, and alumni—whose work reflects a shared commitment not only to understanding artificial intelligence, but to ensuring its development and use remain aligned with the values that define the legal profession.
In community,
Jens David Ohlin
Allan R. Tessler Dean and Professor of Law
law.dean@cornell.edu
