Cal. (statewide): California Rules of Court, Rule 10.430 (Generative Artificial Intellige…
Adopted by the Judicial Council of California (effective Sept. 1, 2025; court-adoption deadline Dec. 15, 2025) · Judicial Council of California (statewide)
Verified May 8, 2026
- Citation
- California Rules of Court, Rule 10.430 (Generative Artificial Intelligence Use Policies)
- Order date
- September 1, 2025
Summary
Each California superior, appellate, and supreme court must adopt a written generative-AI use policy by December 15, 2025, or prohibit the use of generative AI.
What does the order require?
- Each California superior, appellate, and supreme court must adopt a written generative-AI use policy by December 15, 2025, or prohibit the use of generative AI.
- Court policies must prohibit entering confidential, personal identifying, or other nonpublic information into a public generative AI system.
- Court policies must ban discriminatory use of generative AI based on protected classifications.
- Court policies must require verification of generative-AI-generated material and correction of hallucinations.
- Court policies must require removal of biased, offensive, or harmful content.
- Court policies must require disclosure via 'a clear and understandable label, watermark, or statement' when final work consists entirely of generative AI outputs.
- Court policies must require compliance with applicable laws and ethical rules.
Practice areas: statewide judicial administration
What the rule requires
Rule 10.430 is California’s mandatory court-policy rule. Effective September 1, 2025, it required every California superior, appellate, and supreme court to adopt a written generative-AI use policy by December 15, 2025, or otherwise prohibit the use of generative AI by court personnel. The rule’s seven operative requirements track the substantive provisions of Standard 10.80 but apply at the court-institution level rather than to individual judicial officers.
The rule’s text is mandatory (“must”), distinct from Standard 10.80’s advisory framing (“should”). Rule 10.430 governs court personnel and the policies courts adopt; it does not directly impose obligations on attorneys, parties, or pro se litigants. Filing rules for those constituencies continue to flow from the California Rules of Professional Conduct, local rules of court, and any individual chambers orders.
The disclosure requirement is the rule’s most operationally distinctive feature: when court work product “consists entirely of generative AI outputs,” the rule requires disclosure via a clear label, watermark, or statement. This is a narrower trigger than the C.D. Cal. chambers orders that require disclosure for any AI-assisted portion of a filing.
Operational implications
Rule 10.430’s December 15, 2025 deadline triggered a wave of court-by-court AI policy adoptions across California. These policies govern how court personnel and judicial officers use generative AI in court work product, outside adjudicative tasks. They are not the source of attorney or party filing obligations. Filing obligations continue to flow from the California Rules of Professional Conduct, local rules of court, and individual chambers orders. Firms practicing in multiple California courts should expect varying internal AI policies under the same statewide rule. Review each court’s local rules and any judge-specific orders for the AI rules that apply to filings.
Companion authority
Standard 10.80 is the parallel advisory standard for individual judicial officers (see California Rules of Court Standard 10.80).