The Rise of Generative AI
Generative AI is rapidly becoming a fixture in legal practice, transforming workflows, expectations, and client demands. According to Thomson Reuters' 2025 Generative AI in Professional Services Report, usage of generative AI among law firms and in-house legal departments has nearly doubled over the past year, with 26% now using the technology and 59% supporting its use in legal work. While the pace of adoption is striking, it has outpaced the development of formal policies, training, and clear legal frameworks for responsible implementation.
Legal Justifications and Ethical Cautions
The legal sector's perspective on AI reflects both enthusiasm and caution. Law firms argue that AI is a powerful tool for efficiency, enabling faster document review, legal research, and drafting of contracts, briefs, and memos. Clients are increasingly encouraging this adoption, with 59% of corporate law departments wanting their firms to use AI and 8% explicitly requiring it in RFPs. The primary legal justification for adoption is grounded in enhancing service delivery under the duty of competence, which increasingly encompasses technological competence. Firms may also argue that using AI improves access to justice by reducing costs and speeding up routine legal tasks.
However, they are simultaneously constrained by ethical obligations to ensure AI is used appropriately. The greatest concern among practitioners remains the unauthorized practice of law: AI providing legal guidance without human oversight. This poses risks to consumers and potentially violates statutes prohibiting non-lawyers from offering legal advice. Lawyers must also ensure compliance with confidentiality rules and supervise technology consistent with their professional duties.
Business Priorities and Regulatory Risk
From the business side, especially tech providers and corporate legal departments, the arguments in favor of generative AI center on innovation, cost reduction, and productivity. Clients see AI as a competitive advantage and a means of achieving predictable, transparent pricing from their legal providers. For tech companies building these tools, AI is presented as augmenting lawyer duties, reducing mundane tasks to free up time for complex, strategic work.
However, companies must also manage regulatory risks, including data privacy compliance under GDPR or state laws like the California Consumer Privacy Act, as well as liability for AI-generated content that may be misleading or inaccurate. Without formal regulations, risk mitigation is left to internal policies.
Redefining Legal Practice
Long-term, this shift may redefine the legal industry's structure. Law firms that fail to integrate AI could lose ground to more agile competitors, while new legal roles may emerge. Courts may soon face novel issues regarding AI-authored content, liability, and due diligence. Meanwhile, the lack of widespread training, with 64% of professionals still untrained, threatens ethical lapses and inconsistent use.
As the gap widens between early adopters and hesitant firms, generative AI could entrench new hierarchies within the legal market, driven not only by legal skill but by technological literacy.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
