A growing number of U.S. law schools are now requiring students to train in artificial intelligence, marking a shift from optional electives to essential curriculum components. What was once treated as a “nice-to-have” skill is fast becoming integral as the legal profession adapts to the realities of AI tools.
From Experimentation to Obligation
Until recently, most law schools relegated AI instruction to upper-level electives or let individual professors decide whether to incorporate generative AI into their teaching. Now, however, at least eight law schools require incoming students—especially in their first year—to undergo training in AI, either during orientation, in legal research and writing classes, or via mandatory standalone courses.
Some of the institutions pioneering the shift include Fordham University, Arizona State University, Stetson University, Suffolk University, Washington University in St. Louis, Case Western, and the University of San Francisco.
What AI Training Looks Like in Practice
At Fordham, for example, first-year students were given two summaries of a public defamation case—one written by a professor, the other by ChatGPT—and asked to identify which was which, then critique the AI version. The exercise showcased not just the capabilities of AI, but also its limitations: it pulled in some irrelevant facts and lacked depth in nuance.
Across participating schools, AI-training components tend to include:
- How generative AI works, including similarities and differences between general models (like ChatGPT) and domain-specific legal tools.
- Best practices for verifying AI-generated content, recognizing misinformation, “hallucinations,” or oversimplification of legal reasoning.
- Hands-on exercises, such as drafting prompts, evaluating AI outputs, and integrating AI responsibly into legal research and writing.
- Ethical, professional, and practical implications: what responsibilities lawyers have when using AI, including issues of accuracy, accountability, and transparency.
Why the Shift Matters
Law school deans, faculty members, and legal employers believe this change is overdue. They argue that AI is no longer futuristic—it’s here now, and future attorneys will need fluency in it. Arizona State University’s Law Dean Stacy Leeds said that soon it will be nearly impossible to be a competent attorney without foundational knowledge of emerging technologies.
Quinnipiac University, for instance, introduced a required one-credit AI course for first-year students this academic year, responding in part to feedback from law firms that new lawyers increasingly are expected to be familiar with AI tools.
Legal employers echoed the sentiment: while many do not yet mandate AI competence among new hires, they see value in graduates who already understand how to work with AI.
Challenges and Uncertainties
Despite rapid adoption, there is no one model for teaching AI in law school. Schools are still working out how to balance AI instruction with traditional legal education—ensuring that teaching legal writing, reasoning, and research remain strong even as new tools are introduced.
Another concern is misuse: AI tools sometimes generate misleading information, invented case law, or sloppy reasoning (“hallucinations”) which, if unvetted, could mislead students. Law schools are trying to embed training that helps future attorneys spot those problems.
Looking Ahead
With more law schools making AI education mandatory, the landscape of legal education is changing fast. Law students entering now will likely complete orientation, first-year writing, and research courses with embedded AI content. Over time, standalone AI-focused courses may become standard.
For law firms and clients, the result may be attorneys who are not only more tech savvy, but more aware of the benefits and pitfalls of AI—improving efficiency, access to law, and perhaps quality of legal services.
Key Takeaways
- AI training is transitioning from optional to required in many U.S. law schools.
- Schools are teaching not only how to use AI tools, but how to evaluate and verify outputs, understand ethical implications, and avoid misuse.
- The move is driven by legal employers’ expectations, evolving professional standards, and the reality that AI is rapidly becoming part of legal practice.
- Uncertainties remain in best pedagogical approaches and how to maintain core legal analysis skills alongside technological fluency.
As law schools adapt, the class of tomorrow will likely enter the profession better prepared for the digital tools that are already transforming legal work. The question is not whether AI has a place in legal education—but how deeply and responsibly it will take root.
💡 Stay Ahead of the Curve:
AI is reshaping the legal profession—don’t get left behind. Visit LawCrossing.com to explore opportunities at forward-thinking firms that embrace innovation and prepare their attorneys for the future of law.
See Related Articles:
•15 Top Law Schools: Best Program for Aspiring Lawyers
•Decode Law Schools Ranking
•Law School Profile
