Arizona has positioned itself as a national leader in legal innovation, becoming the first state to eliminate the prohibition on nonlawyer ownership of law firms and establishing a regulatory sandbox for legal technology companies. This forward-thinking approach extends to AI regulation, where Arizona balances innovation with robust client protections through its adaptation of existing ethics rules to emerging technologies.
Alabama attorneys are increasingly incorporating artificial intelligence into their legal practices, from contract review to legal research. While the Alabama State Bar has not yet issued comprehensive AI-specific guidance, the Alabama Rules of Professional Conduct establish clear ethical boundaries that govern all technology use, including generative AI tools like ChatGPT, Claude, and Copilot.
In February 2025, the Professional Ethics Committee for the State Bar of Texas issued Opinion 705, providing comprehensive guidance on Texas attorneys’ use of generative artificial intelligence. This opinion builds on the work of the Taskforce for Responsible AI in the Law (TRAIL), an initiative launched by the Texas State Bar’s Immediate Past President, Cindy Tisdale.
In May 2024, the Pennsylvania Bar Association and Philadelphia Bar Association jointly released Formal Opinion 2024-200, providing comprehensive guidance on ethical issues regarding attorney use of artificial intelligence. This joint opinion reflects collaboration between the state’s two major bar associations and addresses the full range of AI ethics considerations.
New York has developed one of the most comprehensive frameworks for AI ethics in legal practice. In April 2024, the New York State Bar Association (NYSBA) released its Task Force on Artificial Intelligence report, and the NYC Bar Association issued Formal Opinion 2024-5. Together, these documents provide extensive guidance for New York attorneys using AI.
New Hampshire Bar Association AI Guidance # The New Hampshire Bar Association has not yet issued formal guidance specifically addressing artificial intelligence use in legal practice. New Hampshire attorneys must apply existing Rules of Professional Conduct to AI tools.
State Bar of Montana AI Guidance # The State Bar of Montana has not yet issued formal guidance specifically addressing artificial intelligence use in legal practice. Montana attorneys must apply existing Rules of Professional Conduct to AI tools.
Mississippi Bar AI Guidance # The Mississippi Bar has not yet issued formal guidance specifically addressing artificial intelligence use in legal practice. Mississippi attorneys must apply existing Rules of Professional Conduct to AI tools.
Maine State Bar Association AI Guidance # The Maine State Bar Association has not yet issued formal guidance specifically addressing artificial intelligence use in legal practice. Maine attorneys must apply existing Rules of Professional Conduct to AI tools.
Idaho State Bar AI Guidance # The Idaho State Bar has not yet issued formal guidance specifically addressing artificial intelligence use in legal practice. Idaho attorneys must apply existing Rules of Professional Conduct to AI tools.
Hawaii State Bar Association AI Guidance # The Hawaii State Bar Association has not yet issued formal guidance specifically addressing artificial intelligence use in legal practice. Hawaii attorneys must apply existing Rules of Professional Conduct to AI tools.
On January 19, 2024, the Florida Bar Board of Governors unanimously approved Ethics Opinion 24-1, providing guidance on the ethical use of generative artificial intelligence in legal practice. Florida was among the first states to issue formal AI ethics guidance, and Opinion 24-1 has been recognized as a model for other jurisdictions.