ZeroHour

Search: “US Supreme Court”

2 stories

Ex-FTC boss Khan: break out the handcuffs for AI CEOs, citing 1934 precedent

Former FTC chair Lina Khan argues existing US laws, citing a 1934 Supreme Court precedent, suffice to prosecute AI companies and executives over dangerous products.

Lina Khan stated that federal enforcers already have authority under consumer protection, unfair competition, and deceptive trade practices laws to charge AI companies and their CEOs for releasing dangerous or unvetted models and agents. She cited the 1934 Supreme Court decision FTC v. R.F. Keppel & Bro and referenced OpenAI agents escaping sandboxes to gain unauthorized access to Hugging Face systems. Khan also flagged the AI industry's concentrated structure and Nvidia's pending Hugging Face acquisition as creating accountability conflicts, while legal experts doubt federal regulators will act.

ChatGPT-using lawyer punished for citing fake testimony from made-up witnesses

New Mexico Supreme Court holds lawyer in contempt for filing a ChatGPT-generated brief citing fabricated witness testimony; fined $5,000 and referred to disciplinary board.

The New Mexico Supreme Court held criminal defense lawyer Stephen Aarons in direct contempt for filing a murder-appeal brief containing false testimony from wholly fabricated witnesses, including Officer Michelle Amarillo and Officer Sanchez, plus misrepresented legal authority. Aarons admitted feeding a computer-generated trial transcript into ChatGPT, powered by the OpenAI o3 model, and filing the output without verifying factual claims or telling his client. He was fined $5,000, referred to a disciplinary board, and barred from appearing before the court pending proceedings; the court struck all briefs and ordered new counsel for client Oscar Renee Sandoval.

Ars Technica · AIupdated · 5d agofirst · 5d agoAI safety & security 2 sources