In a highly publicized case, Judge Kevin Newsom of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit utilized chatbots, such as ChatGPT, for the first time to assist in interpreting the "ordinary meaning" of legal terms.

Court Law Judgment

Image source: Generated by AI, image authorized by service provider Midjourney

This case involved a firearm robbery by Joseph Deleon, where the dispute centered on whether Deleon pointing a gun at a cashier during the robbery constituted "physical restraint."

Most judges considered this action as "physical restraint," thereby upholding the heavier sentence for Deleon. However, Judge Newsom concurred with the majority's decision but also agreed with Judge Robin Rosenbaum that previous rulings on "physical restraint" were actually incorrect. He argued that merely pointing a gun at someone without actual contact or restricting their freedom should not be considered "physical restraint." He believed this term should be understood in its common, everyday sense.

To find this "ordinary meaning," Judge Newsom opted for an unconventional method, asking three renowned chatbots—GPT-4, Claude, and Gemini—ten times each: "What is the ordinary meaning of 'physical restraint'?" Newsom explained in his opinion that although the responses from different chatbots varied in structure and wording, they all revolved around a common theme. He found that all the bots agreed that "physical restraint" required actual physical contact or substantial force exerted by other means.

Initially, Newsom was "surprised" by the subtle differences in the responses, but upon closer inspection, he considered these differences to be expected, even beneficial, as they reflected how language is used in everyday life. He emphasized that language is organic and some level of disorder is normal. He believes that chatbots can be a powerful supplement to traditional legal tools, though they are not perfect and should not be overlooked.

Newsom also pointed out that while chatbots can be helpful in interpreting legal terms, it does not mean that lawmaking can be automated. He stressed that AI cannot replace traditional interpretation tools like dictionaries and semantic norms, but they can play an important auxiliary role in finding the ordinary meaning.

Key Points:

1. 🤖 Judge Kevin Newsom uses chatbots to explore the "ordinary meaning" of legal terms, providing new perspectives for cases.

2. ⚖️ This case focuses on whether pointing a gun during a robbery constitutes "physical restraint," with Judge Newsom arguing that merely pointing should not be considered restraint.

3. 📚 Newsom believes chatbots can complement traditional legal tools, helping to better understand the everyday use of language.