1 day ago
12
ARTICLE AD BOX
A federal judge issued a “show cause” order Tuesday demanding to know why a lawyer in a lawsuit against the Trump administration submitted a brief citing a case that doesn’t appear to actually exist.
Judge Amit P. Mehta, a Obama appointee to the court in Washington, said Samata Reynolds, the lawyer, could face sanctions for including the citation to the “seemingly nonexistent” case, Moms Against Poverty v. Department of State.
“The court has found no such case on Westlaw or in the court’s electronic docketing system,” the judge wrote.
He gave Ms. Reynolds 10 days to explain herself.
Westlaw is a leading compendium of judicial decisions.
The case involves a foreign student who challenged the Department of Homeland Security’s attempt to revoke his student registration in the government’s database. He was part of a broad culling of students the Trump administration undertook.
DHS backed away from the effort, but the plaintiff — known in court documents as “Student Doe” — said he still faces legal uncertainty, and a court order is needed to settle things.
In arguing that the court has jurisdiction, Ms. Reynolds used the Moms Against Poverty citation, saying it came from a case decided Dec. 23, 2022, by the federal district court in Washington. That’s the same court where Judge Mehta sits.
The Washington Times has reached out to Ms. Reynolds for this story.
Judge Mehta, in his order Tuesday, didn’t guess at how the potentially mistaken citation made its way into the brief, but courts across the country are grappling with what’s come to be called “AI hallucinations.” That’s where a lawyer used an artificial intelligence application to assist in writing briefs, and the AI fabricated a case.
Judges have been imposing fines on lawyers who submit briefs with AI-generated bogus citations, though lawyers who admit their mistakes early often escape with relatively light penalties.
In some cases, judges have expunged expert testimony that included fabricated citations.
English (US) ·