Chicago Law School bans laptops and phones for first-years to combat AI overreliance

University of Chicago Law School Implements Sweeping Device Ban

The University of Chicago Law School has introduced what appears to be among the most restrictive AI policy measures adopted by any U.S. law school, banning first-year students from using laptops and phones in required courses starting this fall 1

1

. The comprehensive AI strategy, unveiled Thursday, targets core first-year classes including constitutional law, torts, and property, where electronic devices will be prohibited to curb reliance on generative AI tools 2

2

.

Dean Adam Chilton told Reuters he was unaware of any other law school with a blanket first-year laptops and phones ban of this scope 1

1

. The policy reflects mounting concern that easy access to AI can weaken essential human skills when students rely on it too heavily during their formative learning period.

Three-Pronged AI Strategy Targets Critical Thinking

The school spent the past year developing a three-pronged AI strategy after consulting with alumni, law firm leaders, business executives, legal technology professionals, and students 4

4

. The approach focuses on developing AI-resilient pedagogy and assessment, elevating skills that distinguish excellent lawyers, and teaching responsible AI use.

"We need to ensure that our students actually learn to think critically, strategically, and independently without relying on AI; but we also must face the reality that AI tools are already widely available to our students, and our graduates will be expected to be prepared to use them in legal practice," the school stated 5

5

.

Under the new rules, professors may appoint designated classroom scribes who use electronic devices to take shared notes for the class 1

1

. All in-class exams will be administered without access to the internet, electronic files, or apps, ensuring students must answer legal questions without consulting AI 2

2

.

Legal Education Confronts AI Cheating Crisis

The policy arrives amid growing concerns about AI cheating scandals across higher education and the legal profession. A Brown University professor recently uncovered what might be the largest AI cheating scandal in Ivy League history, suspecting over half his students used chatbots on an exam 3

3

. Princeton University abandoned its century-old Honor Code tradition by requiring supervised exams due to AI cheating concerns 3

3

.

The legal profession itself has demonstrated the risks of AI overreliance. Countless lawyers have faced judicial admonishment after submitting court filings containing AI hallucinations, including fabricated case law and incorrect citations 3

3

. These incidents underscore why law schools must ensure foundational skills remain intact before introducing AI tools.

"AI is forcing us to ask ourselves, 'What are the essentially human skills that we should be training that AI can't replace?'" Chilton said, emphasizing the importance of preparing students for situations when they must answer legal questions on the spot without consulting AI 1

1

.

Balancing AI Integration with Academic Integrity

While the device ban is strict, the University of Chicago Law School emphasizes it is not prohibiting AI entirely. Legal research and writing courses will first focus on writing without AI before layering AI-assisted techniques for research, revision, and oral argument preparation 5

5

. The school has also added upper-level courses explicitly focusing on AI and established an AI lab where students learn to develop legal tools 1

1

.

"If you want to use AI as a study partner, if you want to use AI to ingest your notes from class and then create questions to quiz you on the material, that's great," said William Hubbard, professor of law and economics and chair of the AI Committee 3

3

. "That's not a shortcut. There are ways that using AI can strengthen the learning process and that's what we're trying to lean into."

Clinical professor Mark Templeton, who sits on the AI Committee, explained the goal is guiding students "toward using AI in ways that promote learning rather than inhibit it" 2

2

.

Contrasting Approaches Across Law Schools

The University of Chicago's approach differs from Berkeley Law, which in May introduced rules that drastically limit student AI use. Critics argued Berkeley's AI policy prohibits too many legitimate uses at a time when legal employers expect newly minted attorneys to know how to use the technology 1

1

. Berkeley banned students from using AI to "conceptualize, outline, draft, revise, and edit their work" for coursework and exams 2

2

.

Chicago's model treats AI as technology lawyers will inevitably work with, rather than attempting to shut it out completely. "It is simply unrealistic to think that students and lawyers will not use AI," the school's memo states, while acknowledging that "there is no guarantee that the specific AI tools or techniques that are ascendant today will be useful when current students enter practice" 2

2

.

Chilton expects mixed reactions from incoming first-year students, though he noted that laptop bans previously imposed by individual Chicago professors have generally been well-received by students who felt it improved their focus 1

1

. The school is piloting the new rules for the upcoming academic year, recognizing that "no statement of an AI strategy or vision can be final" as technology and legal practice continue to evolve 4

4

.