Artificial intelligence is increasingly entering the legal system, raising questions about what makes human judgment unique.
Many fear that automation could erode the “human essence” of legal decision‑making. But what exactly is that essence, and is it worth preserving given our own tendencies toward bias and error? Drawing on longstanding theological and philosophical debates about mercy and justice, this talk considered how humans and machines should share responsibility in law.
Justice concerns what people deserve, while mercy is by definition undeserved and cannot be fully explained by legal rules. Because of this, even if machines can help produce more consistent or just outcomes, the merciful dimension of judgment will be far harder to automate.
This lecture on February 11 commemorated the investiture of Kiel Brennan-Marquez as the Wallace Stevens Professor of Law.