Illinois Offers a Practical Roadmap for AI Implementation in Law Firms

Illinois Offers a Practical Roadmap for AI Implementation in Law Firms

Ready or not, generative artificial intelligence (GAI) is becoming a regular part of daily legal work. So much so that, according to the 2026 8am Legal Industry Report, which will be published in early 2026, individual use of general-purpose GAI tools has more than doubled in law firms over the past year. Acknowledging this reality, bar associations across the country have released resources designed to help lawyers adopt GAI more thoughtfully and responsibly. 

For example, in October, the Illinois Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission released The Illinois Attorney’s Guide to Implementing AI, which offers a practical and plain-language resource for attorneys seeking to implement GAI in their firms.

The Guide offers lawyers a clear, commonsense roadmap for integrating GAI into their practices. It explains how attorneys can utilize AI tools while still fulfilling their ethical obligations.

The Commission’s message is simple: Legal professionals can use AI as long as they keep their professional obligations front and center.

The Commission approaches GAI pragmatically, explaining that “(l)awyers do not need to become AI experts to use GAI tools effectively, but they do need a structured approach to evaluating the many tools that are available, classifying the type of data these tools will process, and communicating with clients about how GAI may be used to work on their matters.” In other words, lawyers are not required to understand how these systems are built; instead, they must assess applicable risks and choose GAI tools accordingly.

In the first section of the Guide, the Commission outlines when and how attorneys should use GAI, advising that they may utilize these tools as long as they continue to fulfill their duties of competence, privacy, confidentiality, supervision, and accountability. These obligations require that steps be taken to ensure the protection of sensitive information, regardless of who uses the tool within the firm. 

The Commission emphasizes that users maintain full responsibility for all AI-generated content. While AI can assist with research, idea generation, writing, and more, lawyers must nevertheless apply their own judgment before relying on any output.

Next, the Guide provides a step-by-step process for evaluating GAI. First, lawyers must classify the types of information that will be entered into the tool. Then, determine the level of protection needed based on the type of information involved. Once the data is appropriately categorized, lawyers can identify which safeguards offered by the GAI provider and tool will be required.

Next, the Commission advised lawyers to refrain from relying solely on marketing language. Tools that are described as “enterprise-grade” or “business-focused” may still lack the features needed to protect confidential data. Instead of trusting the claim, lawyers should vet the provider and inquire about the tool’s applicable security protections. These could include authentication, model training practices, data retention, data isolation, supply chain risk, AI risk management, security risk management, and terms of use. 

The guide also provides checklists, sample policies, client notices, and consent forms to help lawyers evaluate GAI tools, document their decision-making processes, and communicate transparently with clients. Specifically, the appendix includes a GAI Terms of Use Checklist for assessing vendor contracts, a Sample Notice of Artificial Intelligence Practices to help firms explain their AI-related decisions and safeguards, a Sample Use of GAI Tools Policy for setting firmwide rules and responsibilities, and a Sample Informed Client Consent Form to support obtaining clear client consent when AI tools are used. Together, these resources help lawyers adopt GAI responsibly into their firms.

All in all, the guide offers a balanced approach to GAI adoption, encouraging legal professionals to use it with care: “When used with appropriate safeguards, artificial intelligence can strengthen legal practice, including for solo and small firms,” and that responsible use calls for lawyers to “remain curious, apply appropriate safeguards, document decisions, and maintain meaningful human oversight.” 

If you haven’t yet chosen a GAI tool for your firm because you were waiting for thorough guidance, then you’re in luck. Even if you’re not licensed in Illinois, this guide offers an in-depth analysis of the ethical and technical issues, along with a roadmap for thoughtful adoption. With this resource in hand, there’s no better time than now to begin integrating GAI into your law practice.

Nicole Black is a Rochester, New York attorney, author, journalist, and Principal Legal Insight Strategist at 8am, the team behind 8am MyCase, LawPay, CasePeer, and DocketWise.She is the nationally-recognized author of "Cloud Computing for Lawyers" (2012) and co-authors "Social Media for Lawyers: The Next Frontier" (2010), both published by the American Bar Association. She also co-authors "Criminal Law in New York," a Thomson Reuters treatise. She writes regular columns for Above the Law, ABA Journal, and The Daily Record, has authored hundreds of articles for other publications, and regularly speaks at conferences regarding the intersection of law and emerging technologies. She is an ABA Legal Rebel, and is listed on the Fastcase 50 and ABA LTRC Women in Legal Tech. She can be contacted at niki.black@mycase.com.