A DEI Judge Blocked DEI Ban in Ruling Written by AI

FrontPage Magazine ^ | Aug 3 2025 | Daniel Greenfield

[texas booster]

That’s usually a symptom of AI. And he’s the second federal DEI judge to be caught doing it.

On the same day in New Jersey, U.S. District Judge Julien Neals withdrew a ruling he issued in a securities lawsuit after defense attorneys told, opens new tab the court that the decision made factual errors and included quotes that the lawyers said were not in the cited cases.

Neals is a Biden appointee. ...

[texas booster]

Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center, is a New York writer focusing on radical Islam and leftism.

AI has enabled all sorts of DEI employees to not do their jobs. But a federal judge who lets AI write his rulings is violating professional standards and should be dealt with.

Short and sweet. Or bittersweet. Judges can be corrupt, and Democrat judges the most corrupt.

Ping out to the Daniel Greenfield Ping! list.

As always, please FReepmail me if you want on or off the esteemed Daniel Greenfield ping list.

Daniel Greenfield's website: The Sultan Knish blog

[butlerweave]

Something these 2 judges have in common besides no brain ?

[Paladin2]

AI is DIE or worse?

The future is looking bleak.

[maro]

A judge using AI this way, even once, should be summarily impeached.

[montag813]

If Justice Jumanji Brown used AI to write her dissents, it would be a distinct improvement, and far more accurate.

[rktman]

Yeah, the ‘not real’ write up for our band make the Beatles look like hacks. 🤣🤣🤣🤣👍

[Petrosius]

In a perfect world but the Democrats would never support it.

[FlyingEagle]

AI

Not artificial, it is real.

Not Intelligent- it is idiotic really.

Not trustworthy. Of course DEI communists use it.

[Lurker]

I’m not very impressed with natural intelligence these days.

L

[Robert A Cook PE]

I would think that - if ANY evidence or implication EVER comes up that a particular judge's opinion or ruling or injunction is signed but written by ANY AI source - then that ruling would be immediately thrown out on appeal.

That is, the FIRST thing a losing party does is research the injunction itself or the ruling (by AI) to look for artificial or copied or objectively false sentences and references.

Use AI to look for plagiarism, like every high school teacher now has to do on every writing assignment.

[thegagline]

“But the order was riddled with mistakes — naming plaintiffs who weren’t parties to the suit, quoting state law incorrectly and referring to cases that don’t appear to exist.”

In a word, lazy. Bob Grant would refer to this Judge as a “washroom attendant.”

[Celtic Conservative]

Use of Artificial Intelligence reveals organic stupidity.

CC

[Bruce Campbells Chin]

Almost certainly, the draft opinion was written by the Judge’s law clerk. But in the end, that doesn’t matter. Either he is hiring the wrong people or not supervision their work properly. To me, that’s grounds for impeachment and removal from office. Nobody practicing before him can have any faith in his judgments moving forward.

[ConservativeMind]

“DEI” = “Don’t Expect Intelligence”

Indeed.

[dinodino]

This judge should be removed from the bench. There is absolutely no reason for any lawyer to be using AI to write opinions.

[Sirius Lee]

The future is looking bleak.

I remain hopeful. People are waking up to the fact that AI is utter garbage. GIGO. The sooner folks realize this the better.

Coincidentally, only a handful of idiots trust the media anymore.

[Adder]

Its still garbage in garbage out.

That’s like a universal trvth...

:]

[pburgh01]

This Jimmy needs to be impeached.

[AbolishCSEU]

NOT the Bee?