AI Is Changing Legal Practice, But Human Judgment Still Leads
Artificial intelligence is rapidly becoming part of everyday legal practice. Lawyers use it to summarize documents, organize information, and draft early outlines. But according to Fried Goldberg LLC attorney Nathan A. Gaffney, that’s only scratching the surface of what the technology can actually do.
In a recent article published in the AAJ TLG Journal of Trucking Litigation, Gaffney argues that the biggest misunderstanding about artificial intelligence in the legal profession is the belief that it exists to replace legal thinking. Instead, he explains that its greatest value comes from helping lawyers think more deeply and more clearly.
Rather than treating AI as a shortcut that replaces judgment, the real opportunity is to use it as a structured thinking partner that expands the lawyer’s mental workspace while leaving professional judgment firmly in human hands.
AI Should Enhance A Lawyer’s Thinking, Not Replace It
Many conversations about artificial intelligence focus on automation. Some firms view the technology primarily as a way to draft faster, summarize faster, or reduce time spent on routine tasks.
Gaffney suggests that mindset misses the point.
The real power of AI emerges when it’s used to enhance human reasoning rather than replace it. Instead of acting as a push-button tool that produces legal work product, AI can function as a structured partner that helps lawyers test arguments, examine theories, and refine their thinking.
When used this way, the technology doesn’t eliminate effort. In many cases, it encourages more rigorous thinking. A lawyer who might normally identify three strategic angles in a case may uncover five when using AI to explore the same issue from multiple perspectives.
The difference isn’t automation. It’s amplification.
Treating AI As A Thought Partner
One of the key ideas in Gaffney’s article is the concept of using AI as an external thinking space.
Lawyers often develop case theories internally through a process of silent reasoning and self-questioning. Generative AI tools allow that internal dialogue to move onto the screen where ideas can be examined, challenged, and refined in real time.
Instead of asking the technology to write deposition questions or legal arguments immediately, a lawyer might begin by discussing the strategic landscape.
For example, before preparing to depose a trucking company safety director, a lawyer might explore:
- The psychological dynamics that encourage honest testimony
- Narrative themes that frame training failures clearly
- Strategic approaches that reduce defensiveness from the witness
- Areas where the record may reveal gaps in company safety practices
By working through these issues conversationally, the lawyer develops a stronger strategic framework before drafting any questions at all.
The process keeps the lawyer in control of the reasoning while the technology helps expand the range of ideas under consideration.
Confidentiality Remains A Major Concern For Lawyers
While the benefits of AI tools are becoming clearer, concerns about confidentiality remain one of the largest barriers to adoption in the legal profession.
Attorney-client privilege is a foundational element of the justice system. Lawyers must always protect confidential information and comply with ethical rules governing professional conduct.
As Gaffney explains in the article, much of the anxiety around AI involves two questions:
- Whether confidential information entered into a system could be accessed by employees of the platform provider
- Whether the system could incorporate sensitive information into future outputs
Although documented cases of cross-user disclosure are extremely rare, lawyers must still follow strict ethical guidelines when using these tools.
The ABA’s Formal Opinion 512 and similar state bar opinions outline responsibilities involving confidentiality safeguards, vendor due diligence, and transparency when AI tools are used in legal work.
With those safeguards in place, AI can be used responsibly without compromising professional obligations.
Voice-Driven AI May Change How Lawyers Prepare Cases
One of the more intriguing developments discussed in the article is the use of voice-based AI interaction.
Lawyers often think at the speed of speech but write at the speed of typing. That difference can slow down the development of complex ideas.
Voice-enabled systems allow attorneys to speak through strategic problems out loud while the AI organizes and tests those ideas in real time. The result is a faster, more fluid exchange of ideas that resembles a live brainstorming session rather than a document drafting exercise.
In practice, a lawyer preparing for oral argument might upload briefs and then rehearse argument structure aloud while the system:
- Helps organize key points
- Tests the strength of legal theories
- Simulates questions from opposing counsel or the court
This approach turns AI into something closer to a practice partner during preparation.
Document-Anchored AI Tools Can Improve Accuracy
Another concept discussed in the article involves the difference between general conversational AI and document-anchored analysis tools.
Standard language models excel at brainstorming and idea generation, but they sometimes struggle with large volumes of detailed documents. That can create risks when analyzing complex records.
Tools such as Google NotebookLM allow lawyers to upload transcripts, reports, or case authorities and restrict analysis to those specific materials. The system then examines each document independently while building a structured map of facts and legal issues.
For lawyers handling catastrophic trucking cases, where thousands of pages of records may exist, that type of structured analysis can help identify patterns and inconsistencies that might otherwise take much longer to uncover.
The key principle remains the same: the technology assists with reasoning, but the lawyer maintains control of the analysis.
The Risk Of Letting Technology Replace Thinking
Despite the advantages, Gaffney warns that AI also presents a subtle risk.
As systems become more capable of drafting and summarizing information, lawyers may begin to rely on them for tasks that once reinforced memory, reasoning, and narrative development.
Over time, that type of cognitive offloading could weaken the very skills that define effective advocacy.
To counter that risk, the article suggests maintaining habits that keep the lawyer’s own thinking active. These can include practices such as briefly reflecting on the reasoning process after using AI or restating key arguments without relying on the screen.
These simple steps help ensure that technology supports professional judgment rather than replacing it.
The Lawyer’s Mind Still Matters Most
Artificial intelligence can accelerate legal work, organize massive amounts of information, and expand the space where ideas are tested and refined. But technology alone can't just replace the qualities that define effective lawyers.
Judgment, creativity, empathy, and strategic insight remain human skills.
As Gaffney concludes in the article, the future of the legal profession will belong to lawyers who learn how to use AI to think faster while continuing to think deeply.
At Fried Goldberg LLC, our attorneys focus on complex trucking litigation across the United States, where strategy, evidence, and legal judgment often determine the outcome of catastrophic injury cases. If you or someone you love has been seriously injured in a tractor-trailer collision, you can contact us online to discuss your legal options. Attorneys handling complex trucking cases are also welcome to reach out to discuss collaborating on litigation involving serious truck accidents.
"Fried Goldberg is a treasure in the Atlanta legal community. Their workshops are always so informative, and their hospitality is par excellence. If you have any interest in trucking law, they are more than worth the effort to see in person." - Lisa T., ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐