"Federal Judge's Order" "Lists Incorrect Parties," Includes "Wrong Quotes" and Nonexistent Cases

From Mississippi Today (Taylor Vance & Devna Bose) on Monday:

A ruling from a federal judge in Mississippi contained factual errors — listing plaintiffs who weren't parties to the suit, including incorrect quotes from a state law and referring to cases that don't appear to exist — raising questions about whether artificial intelligence was involved in drafting the order.

U.S. District Judge Henry T. Wingate issued an error-laden temporary restraining order on July 20, pausing the enforcement of a state law that prohibits diversity, equity and inclusion programs in public schools and universities.

Lawyers from the Mississippi Attorney General's Office asked him to clarify the order on Tuesday, and attorneys for the plaintiffs did not oppose the state's request. On Wednesday, Wingate replaced the order with a corrected version.

His original order no longer appears on the court docket, so the public no longer has access to it. The corrected order is backdated to July 20, even though it was filed three days later.

The article also notes that the replacement order still cites "Cousins v. School Bd. of City of Norfolk, 503 F.2d 422, 426–27 (4th Cir. 1974)," though no case with that name or at that citation appear to exist. As the article notes, it's not certain that these errors stemmed from the use of AI (the judge's chambers apparently didn't respond to the newspaper's query about this), but this seems like a plausible speculation given the facts that the newspaper reports.

You can also read the defendants' Motion to Correct Docket, Preserve Record, and for Clarification which seeks to place the original TRO back in the record (and which indeed attaches the original TRO).

Thanks to Damien Charlotin (AI Hallucination Cases Database) for the pointer.

Comments

[Stupid Government Tricks]

I dread the day when you retire, Prof Volokh, and someone fires up an AI replacement which passes the EV Turing Test.

[Supremacy Claus]

Judge is a DEI Yale Law grad. All Yale grads should be barred from any responsible position in government. They have all been extremely toxic to our nation. No known exception.

[David Nieporent]

And here the word "DEI" is just a euphemism for the n-word.

[ReaderY]

Not such an uncommon euphemism. When people say “we don’t want no DEI around here,” that’s often what they’re actually saying.

[Supremacy Claus]

"The article also notes that the replacement order still cites "Cousins v. School Bd. of City of Norfolk, 503 F.2d 422, 426–27 (4th Cir. 1974)," though no case with that name or at that citation appear to exist."

This post be racist. Accurate citations and dates be white supremacy. Worship of the written word, y'all lawyers be racist. Unverified ChatGPT says the following (verification be white supremacy):
Common Values or Practices Framed as "White Supremacy Culture"
These are based on the 1999 paper “White Supremacy Culture” by Tema Okun and materials from certain DEI (diversity, equity, inclusion) programs:
Objectivity
Seen as a myth that hides bias and reinforces dominant viewpoints.
Perfectionism
Holding high standards or focusing on mistakes is criticized as exclusionary or discouraging.
Individualism
Emphasis on self-reliance and independence is said to undermine community or collective identity.
Worship of the Written Word
Prioritizing written communication over oral or lived experience is framed as privileging certain cultures.
Punctuality and Time Discipline
"Time is money" and strict deadlines are considered capitalist and Eurocentric values.
Logic and Linear Thinking
Rational or analytical thought is sometimes critiqued as limiting other cultural ways of knowing.
Objectivity in Science and Math
Certain educators or activists have claimed that math or science, as taught, centers Western/European epistemology and marginalizes indigenous or non-Western frameworks.
Example: The 2021 "A Pathway to Equitable Math Instruction" toolkit argued that emphasizing "getting the right answer" in math can reflect white supremacy culture.
Meritocracy
The belief that success is based on merit is criticized as ignoring structural inequities and privileging those already advantaged.
Standard English
Teaching and requiring standard grammar and writing is viewed as marginalizing non-standard dialects like African American Vernacular English (AAVE).
Nuclear Family Model
The traditional family structure is sometimes portrayed as a white, heteronormative ideal that excludes other valid models.
Examples That Have Drawn Public Criticism
Smithsonian's National Museum of African American History (2020):
A chart describing traits of white culture (e.g., hard work, self-reliance, respect for authority, delayed gratification) was removed after backlash for stereotyping both white and non-white people.
Seattle Public Schools (2019):
Draft ethnic studies curriculum included questions about how math has been used to "oppress and marginalize people and communities of color."
University DEI Programs:
Trainings have included claims that traits like competition, professionalism, or objectivity perpetuate systemic inequity.

[Poxigah146]

I don't see any issue with that.

[mike petrik]

You mean like “diversity candidate“?

[TwelveInchPianist]

When is it not?

[Riva]

I think I understand now. So, when people criticize blithering idiots like Justice Jackson, who can't define what a woman is or identify a legal issue, they really only object to Jackson because of her race, not that she is demonstrably by all standards, an idiot. But when you and your troll friends attack Justice Thomas as an "Uncle Tom," that's based on an objective review of the quality of his opinions. Thanks crazy Dave, for clarifying that.

[Judge Magney]

Especially Brett Kavanaugh, Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas, and JD Vance!

[gVOR08]

Appointed by Ronald Reagan.

[Poxigah146]

District court appointments meant nothing in the blue slip days. But you knew that.

[IANNAL]

You don't believe that he actually relocated to the Hoover Institution, do you?

[Stupid Government Tricks]

You don't believe that where he lives is actually relevant, do you? Did my comment have anything to say about where he lives? Are you an AI?

[IANNAL]

I'm saying that we might already have gotten Turing'd.

[Supremacy Claus]

[Kleppe]

I anxiously await the judge receiving an OSC. Oh, who am I kidding? There's no accountability for lawyers after they put the robes on.

[Glaucomatose]

Maybe judges who were old enough to have been appointed by Reagan should have to take periodic tests before using AI - sort of like annual driving tests for seniors to keep their licenses.

[Absaroka]

The judge was appointed by Reagan in 1985, so presumably he had figured out how to do the judge thing without AI. Why start using it? The ravages of time making it hard to keep up the old fashioned way? The same ravages making him lean too hard on newbie clerks who haven't learned the old school ways?

[Area Man]

My first thought was his clerks did this and he just didn't check their work. Until AI is highly reliable (if it ever is), judges should ban its use in their chambers.

[Andrew Dhuey]

My first thought is that this 78-year-old judge thought he'd write the TRO himself. Law clerks are busy on other cases, so he's got this. And hey -- look at this fancy AI app that generates an opinion for you!

Of course, it could also have been a law clerk. That seems less likely to me, though.

[David Nieporent]

I mean, no way (at this point) to know, but my gut is the opposite: he asked his clerk to do a rush job, and the clerk tried to take a shortcut, and the judge didn't check.

[Andrew Dhuey]

David, I think the presence of the non-existent 4th Cir. case in the *corrected* TRO opinion points to the judge acting alone, with little or no involvement from the law clerks. If a law clerk had been responsible for the initial disaster, I'd think the judge would have gone ballistic, and maybe reassigned the case to another clerk (while considering terminating the clerk responsible). Either way, the clerks in chambers would have probably worked together to put out the fire.

But if the judge were acting alone, the clerks would probably not think it is their place to intervene. That's how I could see "Cousins v. School Bd. of City of Norfolk, 503 F.2d 422, 426-27 (4th Cir. 1974)" show up in the corrected TRO, even though there is no such case.

[Michael D]

I agree with the scenario you describe. It makes much more sense than a judge who’s had been on the bench for decades suddenly uses AI without fact checking.

[Ridgeway]

Is it possible that the applicant supplied the order (likely generated by AI), and the judge signed that initially?

In lots of other litigation contexts, motions include a draft order that just (hopes the movant) needs a signature.

[David Nieporent]

Not saying it's impossible, but that happens a lot less in federal court than in state court. In particular, this is a substantive 17-page opinion & order; I think it unlikely that the plaintiff prepared it.

(The only time I've personally encountered that in federal court is in the case of unopposed orders — for example, a joint motion for approval of a class action settlement. In that context, the order is basically boilerplate, simply reciting the approval factors with a few fill-in the blank details and then saying it's approved. But this, of course, was a contested motion.)

[Longtobefree]

The clerks were not appointed by Regan - - - - - - - -

How about any member of the judiciary who uses AI immediately loses their job and pension, and is barred from government employment at any level?

[Michael D]

As a final product, maybe so. But AI can be a helpful tool in writing, and I also play with it to design ships for fun.

[Syd Henderson]

Longtobefree: yes, impeachment exists.

[wvattorney13]

You notice that in all of these cases when attorneys do this there are rules to show cause, sanctions, referral to the disciplinary boards, and lectures in opinions detailing all of the sordid background?

But when a judge does it, it gets MIB mind wiped and the new order backdated on the docket and the old one purged from the file.

[TwelveInchPianist]

For the same reason that judges who issue clearly invalid search warrants get immunity, but the cops who execute them don't.

Judges make the rules.

[Darwinnie]

I guess this is interesting and all, but I wish there was more blogging about things that matter.

[wvattorney13]

I disagree. Whatever the merits outcomes, I would like judges issuing opinions and not chatbots. I find this appalling.

[Syd Henderson]

The original restraining order was in place for a week before it was revised. I'd say it does matter.

[wvattorney13]

After looking at the original, can there be any doubt that this was AI? The numbered lists and paragraph breaks are dead giveaways.

And it was very poor AI. The author couldn't be bothered to verify that the parties were correct?!? The author did not realize that he or she was citing the testimony of fictitious people?!?

I can sympathize with being in a hurry and not checking a case cite (although I don't condone it) but how do you have a brief/order where it says that Susie Smith said X, Y, and Z when you (supposedly) reviewed the pleadings and nobody named Susie Smith said anything?

IMHO, not issuing a correction and manipulating the case file to delete the embarrassing entry is a far greater violation than the use of AI. The judge is manipulating the public records.

ETA: It seems as if the "author" did nothing more than load all the pleadings into ChatGPT and tell it to draft an order granting a TRO based on them. And then hit "file."

That's really bad. Way worse than the previous articles.

[Charles Epperson]

Judges who submit rulings that contain AI hallucinations should be censored and potentially removed from being a judge. It is unconscionable that the defender of the legal system, a judge, does not actually write their own orders and opinions by offloading it to something that is known for and wide to making lots of mistakes and errors. I don’t care if he has clerks, the judge, and only the judge is responsible for any ruling, decision, or order. And a judge that does not make sure that everything in the order is copacetic, real, and valid should be removed from office.

[Supremacy Claus]

That is white supremacist nitpicking. Judges have immunity, even when their decisions are devastating.

Lincoln had soldiers enter courtrooms and pistol whip judges that granted writs of habeus corpus to Confederate spies. He issued an arrest warrant for Justice Taney. A lawyer persuaded him to take it back from the hand of the marshall. That warrant is in the Marshall Museum.

[ChristopherJLinas]

The rescinded order should not have been deleted from the file. The public has an interest in being able to see the record of the misuse of AI in judicial system.

[TwelveInchPianist]

The judge should be required to explain what happened here.

Did he let the AI decide whether or not to issue the order? Did he make a decision and use the AI to provide the reasoning? Something in between?

[TwelveInchPianist]

I suppose the explanation could be something as innocuous as the judge was screwing with the AI to see what kind of opinion it would generate and how it compared to his, but somebody screwed up and uploaded the wrong file.

But even if that was true, would anybody believe him?

[ObviouslyNotSpam]

I agree, but what is the mechanism for achieving this?

No one outside that judge's chambers currently has any idea what actually happened--everyone is speculating in every which way. Useless.

[David Nieporent]

I agree, but what is the mechanism for achieving this?

One could file a complaint with the judicial misconduct committee, like the fake one that the Trump DOJ filed relating to Boasberg.

[Bored Lawyer]

To paraphrase Barack Obama -- Don't underestimate AI's ability to f*** things up.