June 1, 2026 (in 3 days): New York: 22 NYCRR Part 161 takes effect, system-wide AI policy for all UCS courts

5th Circuit (statewide for LA, MS, TX federal appellate practice): Fifth Circuit Court De…

Adopted by the judges of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

active

Verified April 27, 2026

Citation
Fifth Circuit Court Decision on Proposed Local Rule 32.3: AI in Briefs
Order date
June 12, 2024

Summary

The Fifth Circuit declined to adopt a special rule regarding the use of AI in drafting briefs at this time.

What does the order require?

Practice areas: federal appellate

Verify this order against the court's official website before relying on it. Standing orders are amended without notice. Requirements vary by judge and case type.

What the order says

In June 2024, the Fifth Circuit issued an on-record decision declining to adopt proposed Local Rule 32.3, which would have required certification regarding generative AI use in briefs. The order is short but operative: it reminds counsel of their duties under FRAP 6(b)(1)(B), reaffirms accuracy obligations under existing rules, and includes a one-sentence enforcement signal that has been widely cited:

“‘I used AI’ will not be an excuse for an otherwise sanctionable offense.”

The decision is included in this tracker because, although no new rule was adopted, the Fifth Circuit’s on-record statement of expectations is itself binding on counsel and frequently cited by district judges within the circuit (E.D. Tex., N.D. Tex., S.D. Tex., W.D. La., E.D. La., M.D. La., N.D. Miss., S.D. Miss.). It is the closest thing to a circuit-wide AI rule in the Fifth Circuit and makes clear that Rule 11 sanctions apply to AI-induced errors regardless of disclosure.

No new rule has been adopted in the Fifth Circuit since June 2024.

Primary source

Court decision PDF: https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/docs/default-source/default-document-library/court-decision-on-proposed-rule.pdf

Sanctions cases decided under this order

Cases in our tracker where this rule appears to have produced or directly informed the sanctions decision.