AI technologies are inexorably encroaching into the legal profession. At a minimum, AI robots can assist judges, perhaps correcting their decisions. I suggest they begin with family law court judges, especially those who rule in divorce cases.

There is increasing female representation in family law court. The administration of justice is supposed to be blind, but we are all products of our environment. Many of the black-cloaked females harbor resentment toward “toxic males,” and are inclined to “correct” perceived historical injustices. Of course they would deny it, but that’s why it’s called unconscious bias. For some anti-male females who spent too much time dallying in gender studies, the bias is more blatant.

Presuming it is trustworthy (in reality it is probably tainted with leftist “publish or perish” bias), one can examine studies about gender bias in the judicial system. An insidious manifestation is the Chivalry Hypothesis (essentially, women are treated more leniently).

The bias in family law court, specifically, can be debated, recognizing that leftist social warriors with nothing better to do may try to confuse and contort the numbers (most publication editors also lean Left). Let them have at it, but here’s one thing that’s agreed upon: the sexes don’t agree on who receives favorable treatment from judges. Thus, no one can agree that divorce courts are fair -- clearly, there’s room for improvement.

AI systems are only as fair as the data they are trained on. The same can be said for female divorce court judges. Unfortunately, the “data” they are trained on, especially in their feminist cabals and gender studies classes, is often biased against men. How else would a derogatory term like “toxic masculinity” even enter leftist parlance? It takes a sick mind to conjure that up after we’ve done so much to make life comfortable. After years of feminist indoctrination, it will take time to reprogram them, but a robot can get a quick upgrade.

An argument against having AI robots totally replace human judges is that they lack independent thought, human judgement, and moral reasoning. Actually, those are reasons why we need them, especially in family law courts where females who lack those attributes are prevalent. Too many of them have been indoctrinated to stick together in sticking it to men. In that mission, they are probably more prone to hallucination than AI instantiations ever will be.

By contrast, AI-driven robots can be programmed to be truly blind – they don’t even have to know the genders of conflicting parties. Just program the robots with all the precedents, laws, rules, procedures, testimonies, document reviews, analytics, amicus curiae briefs, and whatever else is required of sound judicial decisions. If their outputs are free of human hubris and hunches, and if emotional nuances and female “intuition” are discarded, then justice may be equitably blind.

One precaution: the robot will initially be trained on large language models that may contain case law replete with wrongheaded decisions. Servicing AI bots using iterative and recursive techniques can help cull that legal muck before it is infused into the robot judge, but here’s the kicker: Agentic AI. These robot judges are not your father’s instantiations of AI. Using agentic AI they will be able to invoke external tools to gather more information than any current judge could possibly contemplate. The agentic robot judges will exhibit autonomy and memory as they run their action loops. The outputs will result from continuously improving cycles of perception, planning, action, and reflection. That may sound alarming at first, but a hapless male subjecting himself to the caprice of current family law courts is downright petrifying.

The robots are not quite ready to don a black robe, but they’re getting there: here are some examples in practice. When inculcated with reliable algorithms, laws, and “just the facts,” they will only improve. In the meantime, the “data” the human judges are trained on may be flawed fake feminism. Indeed, it offers no satisfaction at all (more pity than anything) to observe that women in our society are becoming increasingly bonkers, as manifested in their “judgement-free” scream clubs.

After exhaustive mock-trial testing, I'd be inclined to trust an androgynous robot (and thus without susceptibility to some pre- or post-physiological syndrome) more than a flawed human judge with a matriarchal axe to grind. At a minimum, they can be employed to correct judges when making decisions. Here’s what it may look like.

Image: Gemini