In a pioneering move, Arizona’s Supreme Court has unveiled AI-generated avatars, Victoria and Daniel, to announce judicial rulings, marking a first in the U.S. for a state court to leverage artificial intelligence in this way. Unlike typical animated chatbots, like the one utilized by a Florida court to assist website visitors, Arizona’s avatars serve as virtual spokespeople, offering a swift and approachable method of sharing court news.
The integration of artificial intelligence spans numerous fields, from simple online queries to sophisticated medical procedures, and the Arizona Supreme Court’s adoption highlights a commitment to fostering transparency and trust within the judiciary. The motivation to enhance public communication arose, in part, from intense debates following last year’s ruling that permitted enforcement of a Civil War-era abortion law, sparking significant public outcry.
Chief Justice Ann Timmer, emphasizing public trust as central to her tenure since last summer, has advocated for embracing digital outreach. The court’s recent rulings, including the contentious abortion decision and another relating to unwed fathers establishing parental rights, underscored the necessity for more active public engagement in understanding judicial outcomes.
Timmer expressed regret over the court’s initial approach in disseminating information about the abortion ruling, acknowledging that supplementary efforts, like news releases and avatar videos, could have clarified the decision’s complexities. These tools not only offer concise interpretations but also guide the public on initiating legal changes.
The political landscape shifted when Democratic Governor Katie Hobbs repealed the abortion ban in May, followed by a November vote expanding abortion rights in Arizona. Meanwhile, Victoria and Daniel were crafted using the Creatify program, debuting in videos accompanying court decisions. Beyond announcements, they’re envisioned as tools for future projects in public justice education and community outreach.
Since October, the court has published summaries of rulings, realizing video as an effective communication medium. According to court spokesperson Alberto Rodriguez, AI-generated videos streamline production significantly, delivering content within minutes versus hours manually. The justice responsible for an opinion drafts a release, approved by the full bench, which becomes the script for the avatars—distinguishing that the avatars do not interpret rulings themselves.
Victoria and Daniel are designed to embody diverse identities, with clear disclaimers of their AI origins, considering various emotional deliveries, and potential Spanish translations. However, their reception remains under scrutiny.
Mason Kortz from Harvard Law School’s Cyberlaw Clinic notes that while the avatars appear realistic, their voices might betray their non-human nature. He recommends that disclaimers accompanying the avatars be more prominently displayed to prevent misunderstandings.
Asheley Landrum from Arizona State University’s Walter Cronkite School observes that the avatars’ robotic delivery lacks the engagement of conversational storytelling, which might better capture viewers’ attention. She warns that while relatable characteristics could build trust, they also risk the perception of bias in content. Overall, the initiative toes a delicate line in its quest to connect with the public authentically.