New York (statewide unified court system): New York State Unified Court System Interim Po…
Chief Administrative Judge Joseph A. Zayas · New York State Unified Court System
Verified September 30, 2026
- Citation
- New York State Unified Court System Interim Policy on the Use of Artificial Intelligence
- Order date
- October 10, 2025
Status and scope
Applies to the issuing body's own personnel or adjudicators, not to attorney filings, and imposes no obligation on attorneys. It provides: UCS users may use only those generative AI products that have been approved by the UCS Division of Technology and Court Research (DoTCR), which are identified in the attached Appendix.
What the instrument requires of its addressees
- UCS users may use only those generative AI products that have been approved by the UCS Division of Technology and Court Research (DoTCR), which are identified in the attached Appendix.
- All judges and nonjudicial UCS employees with computer access shall be required to complete an initial training course, as well as continuing training, in the use of AI technology. No generative AI product may be used on any UCS-owned device or for any UCS-related work until the user has completed the initial training course.
- No user may input into any generative AI program that does not operate on a private model (by writing a prompt, uploading a document or file, or otherwise) any information that is confidential, private, or privileged, or includes personally identifiable information or protected health information, or is otherwise inappropriate for public release.
- No user may upload into any generative AI program that does not operate on a private model any document that has been filed or submitted for filing in any court, even if the document is classified as public.
- Any user who uses a generative AI program to produce a document or any other content must thoroughly review the content produced by the program and make necessary revisions to ensure that it is accurate and appropriate, and does not reflect any unfair bias, stereotypes, or prejudice.
- Judges and court staff must ensure that AI tools are never actually engaged in the decision-making tasks a judge is ethically obligated to perform, and nonjudicial employees must avoid using AI in any way that violates their own ethical responsibilities.
Practice areas: judicial branch policy
What the policy requires
On October 10, 2025, Chief Administrative Judge Joseph A. Zayas issued the New York State Unified Court System (UCS) Interim Policy on the Use of Artificial Intelligence. Developed by the UCS Advisory Committee on Artificial Intelligence and the Courts (formed in April 2024), it was described by the UCS as “a first-of-its-kind policy.” Scope is internal: it applies to all UCS judges, justices, and nonjudicial employees, on all UCS-owned devices and any device performing UCS-related work.
The policy’s mandatory requirements (Section V) are:
- Pre-vetted tool list. UCS users may use only generative AI products approved by the UCS Division of Technology and Court Research (DoTCR), identified in the policy Appendix. The Appendix was amended in May 2026. The amended Appendix lists Microsoft Azure AI Services, Microsoft 365 Copilot Chat, Microsoft 365 Copilot (currently unavailable), GitHub Copilot for Business or Enterprise, and Trados Studio; the October 2025 Appendix also approved OpenAI ChatGPT Free Version (paid subscriptions prohibited), which the May 2026 amendment removed.
- Mandatory training. All judges and nonjudicial UCS employees with computer access must complete initial and continuing AI training. No GenAI use is permitted until the initial course is complete.
- Confidentiality firewall. No confidential, private, or privileged information (including PII or PHI) may be input into any non-private-model GenAI tool. No court filing (even one classified as public) may be uploaded to a non-private-model program.
- Human review required. Any GenAI-produced content must be thoroughly reviewed and revised to ensure accuracy and absence of unfair bias.
- No personal use on UCS devices. AI tools may not be used on UCS-owned devices for personal purposes.
- Supervisor override. DoTCR approval signifies technological safety, not task suitability; judges and supervisors retain authority to prohibit GenAI use for particular tasks by those under their supervision.
What the policy means for practitioners (and what it does not)
This is an internal court-system policy, not a filing rule. It does not impose disclosure or certification obligations on attorneys filing in New York courts. It is also distinct from 22 NYCRR Part 161 (effective June 1, 2026), the statewide rule on AI use by attorneys and parties in papers submitted to UCS courts.
Two practical implications for the practicing bar:
- Documents you file may be off-limits to AI inside the courthouse. UCS judges and staff may not upload filed documents into any generative AI program that does not operate on a private model, such as public ChatGPT. The approved tools in the May 2026 Appendix run in the UCS’s Azure Government or Office 365 tenants, except Trados Studio (AWS Cloud, Office of Language Access).
- The court’s posture toward AI is defined. The policy states that “judges and court staff must ensure that such tools are never actually engaged in the decision-making tasks a judge is ethically obligated to perform.” Practitioners can rely on this when raising concerns about AI use in any specific proceeding.
Practitioner workflow
No direct filing obligations. The policy is useful as background context when (a) advising clients on whether court-bound documents will be processed by GenAI (answer: only inside private-model tenants if at all), and (b) shaping firm-side AI-use policies that mirror the UCS confidentiality firewall, particularly the rule against uploading filed documents to public-model AI even after they are public on the docket.
Scope
All UCS judges, justices, and nonjudicial employees, on all UCS-owned devices and on any device performing UCS-related work. Statewide. Interim status: “intended to evolve with technological advancements, operational necessities, and future iterations of relevant legislation, regulation, and public policy.”
Primary source
Policy PDF: https://www.nycourts.gov/LegacyPDFS/a.i.-policy.pdf
Mirror (Ohio Supreme Court Judicial Services): https://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/docs/JCS/courtSvcs/AI/25-10NYSPolicy.pdf