How California’s State Bar is Guiding Lawyers on Generative AI—and Why It Matters for Legal Tech Users

The rise of generative AI in the legal field is changing how lawyers work, but it also raises serious questions about ethics, confidentiality, and client protection. In May 2025, the State Bar of California released a practical guidance document to help lawyers understand how to responsibly use GenAI in legal practice.

This guidance doesn’t introduce new laws. Instead, it explains how existing rules of professional conduct apply when AI tools are used in a legal setting. Whether you're a solo attorney, a law firm, or a user of legal tech like ProPlaintiff.ai, understanding these guidelines is essential to protect both professional integrity and client rights.

Here’s what every legal professional and tech user needs to know.

1. Lawyers Must Stay Competent with Technology

Under the duty of competence, lawyers must understand the tools they use, including generative AI. That means they should:

• Know how GenAI works and where it can go wrong.
• Get training or collaborate with experts if they lack knowledge.
• Keep up with evolving technologies that impact legal services.
  
  

If an attorney uses AI to draft documents or analyze information, they are still responsible for the outcome. GenAI is a powerful tool, not a replacement for legal judgment.

2. Client Confidentiality Can’t Be Compromised

One major concern: GenAI tools may send data to third-party servers, including cloud services outside the lawyer’s control. This could violate client confidentiality if sensitive information is shared.

Lawyers are expected to:

• Avoid entering identifiable client data into unsecured AI tools.
• Use private, secured versions of AI models where possible.
• Make sure any data shared with AI is properly anonymized.
  
  

Confidentiality isn’t optional. Even a helpful tool like AI must be used in a way that safeguards client trust.

3. Supervision Still Applies—Even with AI

AI isn’t a shortcut around responsibility. Attorneys must supervise:

• Junior lawyers,
• Nonlawyer staff,
• And technology vendors, including AI systems.
  
  

Lawyers can’t blame the tool for bad results. They have a duty to make sure everyone involved in their practice - including automated systems - meets ethical and professional standards.

4. AI Cannot Practice Law

The State Bar makes this point crystal clear: Only lawyers can give legal advice.

Using GenAI to generate arguments or answer legal questions is fine, as long as the lawyer is reviewing and making final decisions. Letting a machine advise a client directly? That’s crossing the line into the unauthorized practice of law.

5. Clients Are Entitled to Transparency About AI Use

Lawyers must tell clients when GenAI is involved, especially if it affects:

• Pricing
• Confidentiality
• Or the quality of service

A client has the right to know how their case is being handled, including whether AI helped write their legal documents. Clear communication is part of informed consent.

6. Truth and Accuracy Still Matter

AI can hallucinate. It can generate plausible-sounding but false information. That’s a big problem in law, where accuracy is everything.

Lawyers are required to:

• Double-check AI-generated content before submitting it.
• Avoid misleading claims in court filings or communications.
• Take full responsibility for what they sign or file.
  
  

There have already been high-profile cases where lawyers faced sanctions for submitting AI-generated, false citations. The lesson: always verify.

7. AI Use Shouldn’t Inflate Legal Fees

Efficiency is one of GenAI’s biggest benefits—but lawyers can’t use it to justify inflated billing.

The California Bar emphasizes that:

• All fees must be reasonable.
• Clients must understand what they’re paying for.
• Faster work thanks to AI should be priced fairly.
  
  

Want a deeper dive into this topic? Check out our related ethics blog: Why Lawyers Don’t Have to Lower Fees for Faster Work

8. Ethical Marketing Rules Still Apply

If AI is used to create content or interact with potential clients, it still must follow advertising rules.

That includes:

• No misleading claims about what a tool or service can do.
• No exaggerating AI’s capabilities.
• Ensuring AI-generated content still reflects the truth of the legal service offered.
  
  

This is a growing issue across jurisdictions. For example, see how the Florida Bar is now officially approving GenAI use—with guardrails.

The Bottom Line: AI Is a Tool, Not a Substitute for Judgment

The message from California’s State Bar is simple: generative AI can help, but it doesn’t replace the lawyer's duty, ethics, or professional responsibility. Anyone using legal tech needs to ensure the tools serve the client, not the other way around.

How ProPlaintiff.ai Protects Users with HIPAA and SOC 2 Compliance

At ProPlaintiff.ai, we take these concerns seriously. Our platform is built with data security and confidentiality at the core:

• HIPAA compliance ensures that any medical or health-related information is protected to the highest legal standards.
  
  
• SOC 2 Type II compliance means that we follow rigorous controls around data privacy, system availability, and security.
  
  

We never store or transmit identifiable case data without encryption, and we never share user inputs with third-party large language models. Whether you're preparing a demand letter or organizing discovery, you can trust that your data stays safe with us.

Want to learn more about how ProPlaintiff.ai empowers modern legal professionals while keeping clients protected? Contact us or try our platform risk-free.