# University of Chicago Law School Embraces AI Rather Than Banning It
University of Chicago Law School has released a new AI Strategy Statement that treats artificial intelligence as an inevitable tool students will use rather than attempting to restrict access.
The statement guides faculty on integrating AI into teaching while emphasizing that the law school's mission remains elevating distinctly human skills. Rather than prohibit tools like ChatGPT, the institution acknowledges students will adopt them regardless and opted instead to shape how AI gets deployed in legal education.
The strategy includes specific pedagogical guidance for instructors. Faculty receive recommendations on how to adjust assignments, exams, and classroom activities to account for student AI use. This means rethinking what skills matter most in a world where AI can generate legal memos or research summaries. The school focuses on developing critical thinking, judgment, ethical reasoning, and client counseling abilities that machines cannot replicate.
The statement also articulates a theory for ethical AI use in legal education. This addresses both how students should use these tools responsibly and what lawyers owe clients when deploying AI. Given that generative AI makes errors and can hallucinate case citations, law schools must teach students to treat AI as a research assistant requiring verification, not a reliable source.
Chicago's approach reflects broader shifts in higher education. Many law schools initially tried restricting AI access during exams or banning it from coursework. That strategy proved difficult to enforce and increasingly outdated as students and employers normalized AI tools. Schools like Yale Law and others pivoted toward integration and skill-building instead.
The Chicago statement positions the law school to prepare students for practice in a legal market where clients expect lawyers to understand AI capabilities and limitations. It also avoids the cat-and-mouse game of trying to detect whether students used AI, which wastes institutional energy.
This strategy carries implications beyond legal education. Law schools often set precedents other graduate programs