Regulation
Ethics Opinions on AI: A 2026 Roundup
Bar associations have converged on competence, confidentiality, supervision and fees. The details still matter.
By Judith Okafor · September 16, 2026 · 10 min read

The ABA's formal guidance on generative AI set the frame, and state bars have since filled in the details. A consensus has formed around four duties.
Competence requires understanding the tools' capabilities and limits. Confidentiality demands careful vendor diligence. Supervision extends to nonlawyer assistance, including software. And fees must reflect actual work.
Divergence remains on client consent. Some jurisdictions expect informed consent before inputting confidential information into certain tools; others treat it as a matter of reasonable safeguards.
Firms operating across jurisdictions should adopt the strictest common standard as policy. It is simpler, safer and easier to explain to clients.
§
Further reading

Regulation
The EU AI Act: What Law Firms Still Haven't Prepared For
As obligations phase in, firms advising clients on compliance may be overlooking their own exposure.
Henrik Vos · October 21, 2026 · 10 min

Regulation
Client Data, AI Vendors and the Duty of Confidentiality
A practical diligence checklist for firms sending sensitive information to AI platforms.
Judith Okafor · July 18, 2026 · 8 min