A federal judge appointed by Donald Trump scolded the Department of Justice for submitting a court filing that included fake case law, which appeared to have been hallucinated by AI.
The case involved an Immigration and Customs Enforcement detainee who had been granted a bond order that was automatically delayed pending appeal.
The delay had since expired, making the issue moot, Judge Hala Jarbou of the Western District of Michigan wrote Thursday in what should have been a short and straightforward case dismissal.
But Jarbou was also forced to address the DOJ’s response to an earlier court order that cited a non-existent case supposedly from the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals.
“It seems this citation was likely produced by generative artificial intelligence,” Jarbou wrote. “It should be obvious that any attorney who uses AI must scrupulously review its work product to ensure that the cited cases exist and that the citations accurately and fairly represent the underlying case law.”
She also cited other federal cases, calling it “improper and unacceptable for litigants… to submit non-existent judicial opinions with fake quotes and citations.”
The Daily Beast has reached out to the Department of Justice for comment.
Alissa Heynen, a lawyer for the plaintiff at the Michigan Immigrant Rights Center, told Reuters in a statement that it was “disappointing” to learn that the government may have relied on hallucinated cases.
“These responses impact real people,” she said. “Relying on fabricated cases is a disservice to the client and to the candor of the court.”
Earlier this year, a veteran federal prosecutor lost his job after filing an AI-generated court brief with hallucinated quotes and other mistakes, according to Reuters.
The latest mistake comes as federal judges have become increasingly fed up with DOJ attorneys making false statements to the court.
Since Trump returned to office, federal judges have blasted the administration for making questionable legal arguments, filing dishonest testimony, and failing to comply with court orders.
Some of those problems originated with the federal departments represented by the DOJ’s lawyers, including the notoriously unreliable Department of Homeland Security, according to a June report from The New York Times.
But since about mid-May, the judicial rebukes have become even harsher as some judges have begun criticizing the DOJ’s lawyers and holding them personally responsible for engaging in grand jury misconduct and making false statements to the court, according to the Times.
The DOJ said in a statement at the time that “any attack on the professionalism or integrity of DOJ attorneys is outrageous and unjustified,” and that the department was advancing and defending Trump’s agenda “with the utmost respect for the institution and rule of law.”
In Wednesday’s case, Jarbou declined to sanction the AI mistake, but warned that it “goes without saying” that the government must ensure its filings don’t include hallucinated case law.
