A recent surge in artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted court filings in the United States appears to be reshaping access to the legal system, with implications for litigants, lawyers, and court infrastructure on both sides of the Atlantic. New research from US academics Anand Shah and Joshua Levy reveals a significant increase in self-represented litigants using AI-generated documents in federal civil cases, prompting debate about the broader impact of AI on legal services and court operations.

Analyzing millions of federal court records, Shah and Levy found that the proportion of cases filed by individuals without legal representation rose from a steady 11 percent between 2005 and 2023 to 17 percent following the widespread adoption of AI tools. This increase drove the majority of growth in overall case filings in recent years. Employing an AI-text detection tool, the researchers identified probable AI-generated content in nearly 18 percent of civil complaints filed in 2026, compared with almost none in 2022.

Notably, the study found no decline in the quality of AI-assisted filings based on case outcomes. These cases were dismissed at similar rates and processed within comparable timeframes as those involving lawyers. However, AI-enabled cases tended to involve a higher volume of documents and court actions, raising concerns about growing strain on judicial resources.

The growth in self-represented plaintiffs primarily involved simpler civil matters such as employment discrimination and mortgage foreclosure disputes. At the same time, the overall number of lawyer-represented cases remained stable or slightly increased. This suggests that AI is expanding access to justice for those with straightforward legal issues who previously may have lacked resources or awareness to pursue claims, rather than displacing legal professionals in complex cases.

The findings have sparked discussion about how courts and legal practitioners can manage an expanding workload amid rising use of AI in filings. Some lawyers in the United Kingdom offer a more cautious perspective based on their experience with the employment tribunal system. Olivia Sinfield, an employment partner at Osborne Clarke, described a “tsunami of AI-enabled claims” generating detailed but often legally flawed complaints. These add to backlogs already extending filings into 2028, increasing costs for businesses required to review and respond to voluminous submissions.

Similarly, employment law consultant Darren Newman highlighted that the UK tribunal system is under significant pressure, noting that AI-generated claims can complicate case management and prolong resolution times. He warned that inflated expectations among claimants, fueled by AI assistance, may hinder settlements that are crucial to controlling tribunal backlogs.

The contrasting experiences between the US and UK systems may be influenced by differences in court protocols and capacity. The US federal courts analyzed by Shah and Levy apply stringent screening to case filings, potentially resulting in higher overall quality compared to state or local courts, where lower-quality AI-aided cases might be more prevalent. By contrast, the UK’s employment tribunals operate with more limited resources, exacerbating challenges posed by increased case volume and complexity.

These developments illustrate how AI is simultaneously broadening access to legal recourse while presenting operational challenges for courts and legal professionals. While AI-assisted filings offer a pathway for more individuals to assert rights without expensive representation, both US and UK experts emphasize the need for adaptable court infrastructures and effective case management strategies to sustain the justice system’s capacity as demand increases.