Illinois (statewide): Illinois Supreme Court Policy on Artificial Intelligence

Scope

The Illinois Supreme Court AI Policy applies to attorneys, judges, judicial clerks, research attorneys, court staff, and self-represented litigants in all Illinois state courts. It is the rare statewide AI policy that governs both filings and the judicial branch in a single document. It does not displace the Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct, which continue to apply.

Scope limit (judicial branch only). The Policy is a judicial-branch document approved by the Illinois Supreme Court via the Illinois Judicial Conference. It binds practitioners appearing in Illinois state courts. It does not reach Illinois executive-branch administrative tribunals, including most notably the Illinois Workers’ Compensation Commission (IWCC), which operates under 820 ILCS 305 as an executive-branch agency. IWCC representatives are governed by 50 Ill. Adm. Code 9020 (which contains no AI provisions as of 2026-04-28) and by the Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct, but not by this Policy.

What the policy requires

The policy was announced December 18, 2024 and took effect January 1, 2025. Its core provisions:

1. Authorization with accountability. AI use “may be expected, should not be discouraged, and is authorized provided it complies with legal and ethical standards.”
2. Mandatory human review. “All users must thoroughly review AI-generated content before submitting it in any court proceeding.”
3. Confidentiality protection. AI applications “must not compromise sensitive information, such as confidential communications, personal identifying information (PII), protected health information (PHI), justice and public safety data, security-related information, or information conflicting with judicial conduct standards or eroding public trust.”
4. No mandatory disclosure in filings. “Disclosure of AI use should not be required in a pleading.” This is a deliberate design choice; Illinois rejects the disclose-and-certify model adopted by several federal courts and Florida circuit courts.
5. Final-work-product accountability. “Attorneys, judges, and self-represented litigants are accountable for their final work product.”

Why the no-disclosure stance matters

Illinois is one of only a handful of US jurisdictions to take an explicit position that disclosure of AI use should not be required in pleadings. The court’s announcement gives the rationale in the Chief Justice’s words: the policy “recognizes that while AI use continues to grow, our current rules are sufficient to govern its use.” The accompanying judicial reference sheet tells judges it “is safe to assume AI was used in pleadings and other written materials” and points to Illinois Supreme Court Rule 137 rather than to a disclosure mechanism.

For firms, this means Illinois state-court matters do not require an AI-use disclosure block in briefs, but the verification and confidentiality obligations are no weaker than in disclose-and-certify jurisdictions. They are just enforced through Rule 11-equivalent standards (Illinois Supreme Court Rule 137) and the Rules of Professional Conduct rather than a separate disclosure regime.

Practitioner workflow

Illinois state court matters: no disclosure block needed, but document internal verification steps. Federal cases filed in N.D. Ill., S.D. Ill., or C.D. Ill. are governed by the local federal rules and chambers procedures, not by this state policy; check chambers rules separately.

Primary source

Policy PDF: https://ilcourtsaudio.blob.core.windows.net/antilles-resources/resources/e43964ab-8874-4b7a-be4e-63af019cb6f7/Illinois%20Supreme%20Court%20AI%20Policy.pdf

Announcement: https://www.illinoiscourts.gov/News/1485/Illinois-Supreme-Court-Announces-Policy-on-Artificial-Intelligence/news-detail/

Bench card companion: https://ilcourtsaudio.blob.core.windows.net/antilles-resources/resources/cb3d6da3-66c7-469d-97f3-41568bdeee8c/ISC%20AI%20Policy%20Bench%20Card.pdf