It is not a secret that American judges have very broad judicial immunity. Apparently, even in cases where a state judge is accused of relying entirely on artificial intelligence to make a judicial decision, the judge is still protected from a civil lawsuit by judicial immunity, according to a new U.S. federal court ruling. Interestingly, the ruling does not determine whether the judge actually used AI or whether such use is legally allowed, reports Reason.
The decision comes from Phillips v. Parlade, decided by U.S. District Judge Gloria Navarro of the District of Nevada. The plaintiff claimed that judicial immunity should not apply because the state judge allegedly turned over her official decision-making responsibilities completely to AI and issued a ruling without using human judgment at all. According to Phillips, delegating 100% of the decision-making meant that the resulting order could not qualify as a ruling performed by a judge. He also said that such complete delegation placed the rulings outside the judge's jurisdiction, which is a rare case that removes judicial immunity.
