How can you identify images generated by AI? Watch our AI CEO take our quiz.
AI-generated images are becoming increasingly popular. Watch Runbo Li, CEO and co-founder of Magic Hour, take an online quiz to get tips for finding AI photos.
As artificial intelligence becomes more prevalent, one Oklahoma court is considering how it can be used in litigating cases.
The Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals adopted new rules on Wednesday, February 18, aimed at ensuring that those using AI in court filings must ensure the information is accurate. Failure to do so will result in sanctions. The rule does not affect other courts, but it marks the first official position on the use of AI in Oklahoma’s judicial system.
The use of generative AI, such as Claude, ChatGPT, and custom apps marketed to the legal industry, is an issue being dealt with in courts across the country, especially when the AI provides false information. Some federal courts have already adopted rules governing the use of AI in legal documents, but Oklahoma’s court could be the first to do so.
In October, U.S. Magistrate Judge Jason A. Robertson harshly criticized lawyers who submitted fabricated AI-generated citations in a case being heard in federal court in Muskogee. After the offending lawyers were “at the mercy of the court,” Robertson imposed financial penalties ranging from $1,000 to $3,000 and allowed them to continue representing clients.
“Machines can construct words, but they cannot believe them. They can process information, but they cannot have beliefs,” Robertson wrote in the order. “Generative tools may be helpful, but they can never replace the moral nerve that turns ideas into advocacy. In this courtroom, artificial intelligence is optional. Actual intelligence is mandatory.”
It is unclear how many county district courts in Oklahoma have adopted the AI rule. A review of regulations issued by the Oklahoma and Tulsa County District Courts found no mention of their use. There is no mention of AI in the rules of the Oklahoma Court of Civil Appeals or the Oklahoma Supreme Court.
Oklahoma Supreme Court Chief Justice Dustin Rowe did not respond to an email seeking comment.
What are the sanctions if AI in court filings is inaccurate?
New rules from the Court of Criminal Appeal set out penalties for failing to ensure that documents created with the help of AI are accurate. Sanctions may include removing documents from the record, finding a party in contempt, and losing the right to appeal certain issues.
“I write this letter to point out the fact that whenever an attorney signs his or her name on a document, by that signature he certifies that all authority citations and incidents in the document are true and accurate, and that all quoted language is accurate and correctly mentioned,” the presiding judge wrote. “This means that lawyers can be subject to sanctions and discipline for signing documents that are found to be inaccurate in the exercise of legal authority.”
As written, this rule also appears to apply to individuals representing themselves.
It’s unclear how often judges in Oklahoma’s court system have dealt with parties filing AI-generated briefs. However, there is one notable example. In September 2025, the state attorney general’s office charged the defense attorney with fraud for submitting documents containing false legal citations and “obvious lies” about the attorney general’s comments.
The legal profession is trying to catch up with AI. The Oklahoma State Bar Association does not take an official position, but provides guidance to attorneys on the use of AI and related court decisions.
OBA spokeswoman Lori Rasmussen said the Law Firm Administrative Assistance Program and Office of Ethics Counsel are monitoring the evolution and use of AI. The organization has been providing guidance to Oklahoma lawyers for several years, including through AI conferences.
