Agentic AI introduces risks that are novel and complex, but the most effective response is a familiar one. Zero Trust answers the problem of when an AI agent misfires on its own by constraining what an agent can do rather than betting on how it will behave.
Why advanced AI will change legal practice without making lawyers obsolete.The future value of lawyers will come less from generating first drafts and more from knowing how to choose, feed, test and deploy professional systems in a way that serves the client’s strategy.
Artificial intelligence is rapidly embedding itself into legal workflows, but much of the conversation treats all use cases as if they carry the same level of risk, even if they do not. The more useful question is not whether AI works, but where it can be safely applied and where it cannot.
As AI becomes embedded in everyday business and legal operations, organizations are confronting a new expectation: simply disclosing AI use is no longer enough. A critical shift is taking place in the legal industry: transparency is no longer just about disclosure; it’s about comprehension.
The use of AI does not alter fundamental obligations of accuracy, reasonableness and accountability. The legal risk lies not in the existence of hallucinations but in the failure to govern and verify them.
A recent decision from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (SDNY), United States v. Heppner, has generated outsized commentary suggesting that the use of generative AI tools may jeopardize attorney-client privilege. A closer reading shows something far less dramatic.
Businesses subject to the CCPA now must conduct risk assessments for certain types of processing activities and, starting in 2028, must certify to California regulators that they completed the assessments.
The Verification-Value Paradox states that increases in efficiency from AI use “will be met by a correspondingly greater imperative to manually verify” the outputs. The result is that the net value of AI in many legal contexts may be negligible once verification is honestly accounted for. For low-stakes tasks, verification costs are light. For core legal work, verification costs are heavy. That’s the tension.
“Shadow AI” highlights a growing risk for firms that have yet to develop comprehensive governance strategies for artificial intelligence. In today’s rapidly evolving digital landscape, the question is not whether AI is present in your organization, but whether it is being managed responsibly.
Over the last decade, technology-assisted review (TAR) has become a preferred choice in the e-discovery toolkit. Now, as generative AI gains traction, legal teams face a new challenge: creating a technology stack that offers the best balance of efficiency, cost and usability.
© Copyright 2026 ALM Global, LLC trading as Centellic.
Advertise with Us Customer Support Terms of Service Privacy Policy
