4 ms·

But did the judge make the decision? I think there's a real question of whether this is a failure of due process rights. But I also think supreme Court Justice

by abeppu 1mo ago

But did the judge make the decision? I think there's a real question of whether this is a failure of due process rights. But I also think supreme Court Justices need to be awake for the court to actually hear arguments, so what do I know.

zdragnar 1mo ago
That is what the article and judgement was about- they can certainly use that argument to appeal the case, but not to hold the judge in the case personally liable.
SpicyLemonZest 1mo ago
There would be a real question if the judge in fact used AI. The plaintiff's complaint (https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nvd.176224/gov.uscourts.nvd.176224.1.0.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nvd.176...) makes it pretty clear that he's just nuts and had no real reason to think she did. But of course a court can't dismiss someone's complaint on the grounds that they're nuts; in order to rule on the substance of this case, a court would have to conduct new hearings to gather all the details about the original hearing in which AI was allegedly used. The purpose of judicial immunity is to push all objections to judicial decisions through the appellate courts, which don't have to re-hear everything before issuing a ruling.
- exmadscientist 1mo ago
  Exactly. And if an appellate court got involved and somehow found a judge outsourced their judging to an AI, it's hard to imagine them accepting that. A "polite suggestion" that the relevant bar or judicial association look in to something, coming from a federal Circuit Court of Appeals, is neither polite nor a suggestion, and will receive the due gravity of a "polite suggestion" coming from one of the most powerful bodies in the country.
aidenn0 1mo ago
IANAL, but my understanding is that Judicial immunity in the US is absolute; if a Judge orders the police to beat up a defense attorney, they cannot be sued for it[1]. 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mireles_v._Waco https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mireles_v._Waco
- TMatthewPhillip 27d ago
  "Judicial immunity tends to corrupt, while absolute judicial immunity corrupts absolutely." ~T. Matthew Phillips, Esq.
Kinrany 1mo ago
The judge did make the decision to outsource to an LLM. This isn't new and isn't too different from tossing a coin.
- TMatthewPhillip 27d ago
  "...and isn't too different from tossing a coin." Nailed it!! :)
nubg 1mo ago
either the judge made the decision (in which case he has immunity) or he didn't (in which case he isn't the right person to sue) the correct steps are appeals in the merit and disciplinary action against the judge
TMatthewPhillip 27d ago
You are correct. It's a due process violation. Here, the judge wrongfully delegated her decision-making duties, and such delegation is forbidden by law. Such delegation is NOT a proper judicial act; therefore, the doctrine of judicial immunity does NOT apply.

by abeppu 1mo ago

zdragnar 1mo ago

That is what the article and judgement was about- they can certainly use that argument to appeal the case, but not to hold the judge in the case personally liable.

SpicyLemonZest 1mo ago

There would be a real question if the judge in fact used AI. The plaintiff's complaint (https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nvd.176224/gov.uscourts.nvd.176224.1.0.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nvd.176...) makes it pretty clear that he's just nuts and had no real reason to think she did. But of course a court can't dismiss someone's complaint on the grounds that they're nuts; in order to rule on the substance of this case, a court would have to conduct new hearings to gather all the details about the original hearing in which AI was allegedly used. The purpose of judicial immunity is to push all objections to judicial decisions through the appellate courts, which don't have to re-hear everything before issuing a ruling.

exmadscientist 1mo ago
Exactly. And if an appellate court got involved and somehow found a judge outsourced their judging to an AI, it's hard to imagine them accepting that. A "polite suggestion" that the relevant bar or judicial association look in to something, coming from a federal Circuit Court of Appeals, is neither polite nor a suggestion, and will receive the due gravity of a "polite suggestion" coming from one of the most powerful bodies in the country.

aidenn0 1mo ago

IANAL, but my understanding is that Judicial immunity in the US is absolute; if a Judge orders the police to beat up a defense attorney, they cannot be sued for it[1]. 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mireles_v._Waco https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mireles_v._Waco

TMatthewPhillip 27d ago
"Judicial immunity tends to corrupt, while absolute judicial immunity corrupts absolutely." ~T. Matthew Phillips, Esq.

Kinrany 1mo ago

The judge did make the decision to outsource to an LLM. This isn't new and isn't too different from tossing a coin.

TMatthewPhillip 27d ago
"...and isn't too different from tossing a coin." Nailed it!! :)

nubg 1mo ago

either the judge made the decision (in which case he has immunity) or he didn't (in which case he isn't the right person to sue) the correct steps are appeals in the merit and disciplinary action against the judge

TMatthewPhillip 27d ago

You are correct. It's a due process violation. Here, the judge wrongfully delegated her decision-making duties, and such delegation is forbidden by law. Such delegation is NOT a proper judicial act; therefore, the doctrine of judicial immunity does NOT apply.