Federal Court Holds Judge Immune After Fully Relying on AI for Ruling
A federal district court ruled that a Nevada state judge who allegedly used artificial intelligence without any human discretion is protected by judicial immunity, dismissing the lawsuit.
The federal court in Nevada addressed a lawsuit accusing a state judge of delegating all decision-making to artificial intelligence. The plaintiff argued that such delegation stripped the judge of jurisdiction and therefore fell outside judicial immunity. Judge Gloria Navarro applied one outlet test for judicial acts, noting that issuing rulings is a core judicial function, the proceedings occurred in the judge's chambers, and the dispute centered on the pending case.
No evidence was presented that the conduct lacked jurisdiction, and the court found the actions judicial in nature. Consequently, the judge retained absolute immunity and the suit was dismissed. While the ruling bars federal suits over the issue, it allows challenges in state appellate courts or disciplinary proceedings.
Why it matters
It clarifies that judges cannot be sued in federal court for decisions made entirely with AI, shaping future use of technology in courts.
In this story
