Open Thread

Reason Magazine · collected 2026-09-04 · by Eugene Volokh
Read the original at Reason Magazine ↗

Summary

This article appears to be an opinion piece or a promotional piece rather than straight reporting, as it contains a clear call to action with a commercial pitch for a publication. The Volokh Conspiracy, a group of law professors, is mentioned as being associated with Reason magazine, which is described as a trusted source of news and analysis.
Written by the local model on 2026-09-04, using this article's own text rather than the other coverage of the same event (that is the story summary below).

Signals How these are calculated →

Claims extracted
0
claim-shaped sentences
Uncertain
no claims
nothing to measure
Leaning
Leans strongly right
of the writing, not the subject
Publisher trust
86.1
red-flag proxy, not a credibility rating
Outlets on this story
3
Technology
Narrative spread
none derived
Analyzed 2026-09-04 · how these are computed

AI analysis (generated at analysis time, not now)

Story summary

Loishirl W. Hall, an attorney at a large financial institution, Deutsche Bank Nat'l Trust Co., submitted a brief to the D.C. Court of Appeals that included citations to cases that didn't exist. When questioned by the court, Hall admitted that four of these citations were "not legitimate legal authority" and likely generated by artificial intelligence (AI) "hallucinations." The court was unable to locate or confirm these cases as legitimate references. Hall's response, filed on June 23rd, acknowledged the error and assured the court that she would personally verify all citations in future briefs, rather than relying on AI tools without confirmation. This incident has raised concerns about the use of AI in legal research and the potential consequences for attorneys, their clients, and the courts. The case is part of a growing discussion about accountability in law firms when using AI to draft documents and briefs.

Written for “AI Filled Court Briefs” on 2026-09-05, grounded in this article and the 2 other(s) covering the same event.
Why this leaning score
The article's own words the score was based on. Each is quoted verbatim and was checked against the article text before being stored, so you can find it in the original.
Score +0.85 Confidence high
Leaning score +0.85 for article 3894 (high confidence, 1 verified quote) · logged 2026-09-04

Story

📰 AI Filled Court Briefs
Technology · 3 article(s) covering the same event.

How this is being covered How these are calculated →

Article leaning vs. publisher reliability
Source leaning vs. consistency

Compared with similar articles

This article reads leans strongly right and hedges an unknown share of its claims. Each row says how that neighbour differs.
Open Thread different event · 100%
Reason.com · 1.00 cosine similarity
⚖️ Leans strongly right 🔴 no claims extracted 📰 publisher trust 94
“The articles have different dates, indicating they are reporting on separate instances.”
Open Thread different event · 100%
Reason Magazine · 1.00 cosine similarity
⚖️ Leans strongly right 🔴 no claims extracted 📰 publisher trust 86
“The articles are two separate 'Open Thread' posts on different dates without any description of a specific event.”
Reason.com
⚖️ Leans strongly right 🔴 no claims extracted 📰 publisher trust 94
“The dates indicate that Article A is from September 3, 2005, while Article B has a different date (September 4, 2026), indicating they cover separate events”
Reason Magazine
⚖️ Leans right further left than this 🔴 22% hedged 7 of 32 📰 publisher trust 86
“Article A is an open thread and does not mention any specific event or incident, while Article B discusses a court case and opinion by Judge Stephen Glickman”
Reason Magazine
⚖️ leaning not scored 🔴 19% hedged 11 of 59 📰 publisher trust 86
“Both articles mention a case called Douglas v. Deutsche Bank Nat'l Trust Co., which suggests they are discussing the same judicial decision.”
Reason.com · 1.00 cosine similarity
⚖️ Leans strongly right 🔴 no claims extracted 📰 publisher trust 94
Reason.com · 1.00 cosine similarity
⚖️ Leans strongly right 🔴 no claims extracted 📰 publisher trust 94
Reason.com · 1.00 cosine similarity
⚖️ Leans strongly right 🔴 no claims extracted 📰 publisher trust 94
Reason.com · 1.00 cosine similarity
⚖️ Leans strongly right 🔴 no claims extracted 📰 publisher trust 94
Reason.com · 1.00 cosine similarity
⚖️ Leans strongly right 🔴 no claims extracted 📰 publisher trust 94

Publisher

Reason Magazine · 39 article(s) · 1 correction(s) detected
SignalValueWeight
Correction rate 0.026 0.4
Uncertainty density 0.141 0.25
Assertive mismatch rate 0.000 0.35
Running correction rate · 1 correction(s)
2026-09-05
Lawyers' Responsibility for Hallucinations in Briefs That They Sign

Who wrote this

Eugene Volokh
25 article(s) here · 0 carrying a prediction
🔮 Perhaps most analogously to alienation of affections, if Alan breaches his contract with Betty, and Cathy encouraged him to breach it, she will in many situations be liable for intentional interference with contract.
2026-09-06 · assertive framing · Alienation of Affections as Complicity
🔮 In a phone call on March 2, Gelb told Netrebko to issue a statement specifically denouncing Putin, or she would be fired.
🔮 A malicious act "include[s] any intentional conduct that would probably affect the marital relationship.
🔮 If you have followed the factual allegations in the case, please post a comment and indicate how you would have voted if you were a juror, based on your knowledge (even if limited) of the factual allegations, and why you would have so voted.
🔮 As part of this mea culpa, Ms. Hall assured the court that she had taken the remedial measure of verifying that the remaining citations in the brief were legitimate authority and pledged that, going forward (presumably in her representation of other clients), she would not rely on any AI tool "for legal research without confirming each authority" or file anything that includes citations she has not independently verified.
🔮 Such a requirement would be impractical, unduly burdensome, and unnecessarily duplicative given the availability of reasonable alternative procedures to guard against erroneous citations.
🔮 If it were, then any profit-seeking news organization could face liability for its failure to investigate, contrary to the principle that a publisher is not "required to seek out contrary stories" to insulate itself from a finding of actual malice.
🔮 Under the rational basis standard, government conduct "is presumed to be valid and will be sustained if the classification drawn by the statute is rationally related to a legitimate state interest."
🔮 To state a violation of § 784.049, a plaintiff must plausibly allege - Defendant published a sexually explicit image of Plaintiff on an internet website; - The image contained or conveyed Plaintiff's personal identification information; - Defendant acted willfully and maliciously, for no legitimate purpose, and with the intent of causing substantial emotional distress to Plaintiff; - Plaintiff did not consent to the publication…. The dispute was about whether the video showed a "sexually explicit image," and the court said no: [T]he statute defines {"sexually explicit image"} as any photograph or video that depicts "nudity" or depicts "any person engaging in sexual conduct." …
🔮 Roe is a Saudi Arabian citizen who, until May 2021, was living full-time in Riyadh and working as a result estate [real estate? -EV] investor.
More on this subject from Eugene Volokh
Open Thread
2026-09-05 · Reason Magazine · 100% similar
Open Thread
2026-08-31 · Reason.com · 100% similar
Open Thread
2026-08-28 · Reason.com · 100% similar
Open Thread
2026-08-27 · Reason.com · 100% similar
All 25 articles by Eugene Volokh →

Topics

Reason

Subjects

Reason ORG · 1×

Narrative

No narrative derived. That requires at least one asserted claim.

Claims (0 extracted, 0 hedged)

No claims extracted from this article.
💬 Give feedback
🕘 History 🎫 Support