Barrett Says Supreme Court Avoiding AI Over Security Concerns
Well, well, well. Justice Amy Coney Barrett has announced that the Supreme Court is *not* using AI because it would be insecure. Yes, the highest court in the land, the institution that decides the fate of the nation, has looked at artificial intelligence and said, 'No thanks, we'd rather stick with parchment and quill.' Speaking at the Crystal Bridges Museum in Bentonville, Arkansas — because where else would one announce a Luddite policy? — Barrett revealed that security concerns are keeping the Court offline. Let us all take a moment to savour the irony: an institution that handles the most sensitive data in the country cannot trust a technology that millions of people use to generate cat poems. It's almost as if the security concerns are a convenient excuse for not wanting to deal with the hassle of modernisation. But hey, at least the clerks' jobs are safe — for now.
What exactly is the Court afraid of? Hackers? Leaks? The AI writing a better concurrence than the justices themselves? Barrett didn't elaborate, but the implication is clear: AI is too insecure for the Supreme Court. Meanwhile, the rest of the government is shoving AI into everything from border control to drone strikes. But the Court? They're holding out. Perhaps they're waiting for a version with a gavel emoji. Or maybe they're worried that an AI would point out how many of their decisions are contradicted by earlier rulings. That would be embarrassing.
The real joke is that this decision probably has zero impact on AI development. The Supreme Court is not exactly a massive tech adopter. But it's a beautiful symbol: the ultimate authority on American law is terrified of a chatbot. So next time you hear a tech CEO babble about 'trustworthy AI,' remember that the nine most powerful judges in the country don't trust it enough to let it near a brief. Perhaps they know something we don't. Or perhaps they just want to avoid the embarrassment of an AI filing a better amicus brief than their clerks. Either way, it's not a great look for the industry.