Artificial intelligence could make originalist analysis easier, federal appeals judge says
Determining the meaning of constitutional provisions at the time that they were drafted, as originalism requires, can be “highly laborious and time-consuming,” according to a federal appeals judge. (Image from Shutterstock)
Determining the meaning of constitutional provisions at the time that they were drafted, as originalism requires, can be “highly laborious and time-consuming,” according to a federal appeals judge.
But that could change with developments in artificial intelligence, Judge John K. Bush said at an event by the Federalist Society at the University of Chicago Law School on Monday.
Bloomberg Law and Reuters covered his speech.
If AI reviewed a large enough database of historic writings, the technology might be able to offer an “expert opinion, if you will” on the meaning of particular words and phrases during relevant time period, said Bush, a judge on the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals at Cincinnati.
The database should include personal letters and other materials to show how the public understood the particular meaning of a word or a phrase, instead of focusing only on the drafters, said Bush, an appointee of former President Donald Trump.
Bush acknowledged that we are “not there yet,” with the technology, which has been known to fabricate answers, and his prediction may not come true.
“But I do sense that we’re entering a new era of human history, a new enlightenment period,” he said.
