PA (statewide judicial branch): Pa. Sup. Ct. Interim Policy on the Use of Generative AI b…
Per Curiam (on the recommendation of the Artificial Intelligence Advisory Committee) · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Verified September 30, 2026
- Citation
- Pa. Sup. Ct. Interim Policy on the Use of Generative AI by Judicial Officers and Court Personnel
- Order date
- September 9, 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: This Policy applies to Personnel using GenAI on UJS Technology Resources. The purpose of this Policy is to promote and ensure the safe and appropriate use of GenAI by Personnel.
What the instrument requires of its addressees
- This Policy applies to Personnel using GenAI on UJS Technology Resources. The purpose of this Policy is to promote and ensure the safe and appropriate use of GenAI by Personnel.
- Personnel may only use or install GenAI tools approved by Leadership on UJS Technology Resources.
- Although use of a GenAI tool may be approved by Leadership, Personnel may be required to seek supervisory approval for the use of a GenAI tool or at a minimum disclose use of a GenAI tool in their work product.
- Personnel must become proficient in the technical capabilities and limitations of GenAI tools before using them and must maintain competence to continue to use them.
- Personnel are responsible for the accuracy of their work and for compliance with this Policy.
- Personnel may share with a secured AI system any case records, administrative records, or information provided that the shared information will be treated in a confidential and privileged manner.
- Personnel shall not share any non-public information with non-secured AI systems.
- Permitted uses of GenAI by Personnel include, but are not limited to: summarizing documents; preliminary legal research, provided the tool was trained on a comprehensive, up-to-date collection of reputable legal authorities; drafting initial versions of documents such as communications and memoranda; editing and assessing the readability of public documents; and interactive chatbots or similar services for the public and self-represented litigants.
Practice areas: judicial branch policy
What the policy requires
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court adopted the Interim Policy on the Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence by Judicial Officers and Court Personnel on September 9, 2025, with an effective date of December 8, 2025.
- Who it covers. “Personnel of the Unified Judicial System” - state-level court employees, judicial officers (including senior status), staff, and county-level court employees under the supervision of a President Judge of a judicial district. Attorneys and litigants are NOT covered; this is internal judicial-branch governance.
- Approved-tools list. Personnel may only use or install GenAI tools approved by court Leadership on UJS Technology Resources.
- Secured vs. non-secured systems. Personnel may share case records, administrative records, or information with a Secured AI System, one that does not retain the data, transfer or sell it to third parties, use it to train an AI system, or expose it to the public domain. Personnel may not share non-public information with non-secured AI systems.
- Competence and accuracy. Personnel must become proficient in GenAI capabilities and limitations and remain responsible for the accuracy of their work.
- Permitted uses. Document summarization; preliminary legal research (only with tools trained on comprehensive, up-to-date legal authorities); drafting initial communications and memoranda; editing public documents; and interactive chatbots for self-represented litigants.
- Disclosure. Even when a tool is approved, Personnel may be required to seek supervisory approval or, at minimum, disclose GenAI use in their work product.
What this means for practitioners even though the policy doesn’t bind them
The policy applies to court personnel, not attorneys appearing before Pennsylvania courts. But the policy signals what Pennsylvania judges will likely expect from practitioners. In November 2025 a Commonwealth Court memorandum opinion in Associated Builders & Contractors, Inc., E. Pa. Chapter v. Bucks County Community College, No. 1172 C.D. 2025, struck a brief containing AI-generated errors and cited this policy.
In practical terms: assume Pennsylvania judges and their law clerks now know what hallucinations are, what “non-secured” tools mean, and what “preliminary legal research” looks like. Filings that obviously rely on un-verified GenAI output should expect heightened scrutiny.
Practitioner workflow
This policy creates no direct obligations for attorneys. But Pennsylvania practitioners should:
- Track parallel guidance for attorneys (see the Commonwealth Court’s November 24, 2025 memorandum opinion in No. 1172 C.D. 2025).
- Verify every citation in any filing prepared with GenAI assistance, since the same hallucination concerns the policy raises about court personnel apply to litigants.
- Expect that opposing counsel and judges will recognize hallucinated citations more readily than they did a year ago.
Scope
All Personnel of the Pennsylvania Unified Judicial System. Effective December 8, 2025. The policy is designated interim; the approving order sets no expiration.
Primary source
Interim Policy on the Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence by Judicial Officers and Court Personnel (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, Sept. 9, 2025, PDF): https://www.pacourts.us/assets/opinions/Supreme/out/Attachment%20-%20106502825326188944.pdf