Does Fed. R. Civ. P. 11 Require Attorneys To Interrogate Declarants On Whether They Used AI To Draft Their Declarations?

A Stanford professor has fessed up to drafting expert declaration with AI and including fake citations in it. “The Court suggests that an ‘inquiry reasonable under the circumstances,’ Fed. R. Civ. P. 11(b), may now require attorneys to ask their witnesses whether they have used AI in drafting their declarations and what they have done to verify any AI-generated content.” Really?

Absent wild red flags, I’d hope that subjecting oneself to felony perjury charges (and 5 years in prison) would do the trick to weed out manufactured citations in the declaration (that, of course, can’t be “true and correct” and “based on personal knowledge”).

Attorneys should be entitled to rely, as a matter of course, on the jurat meaning something. We have enough to keep us up at night without subjecting ourselves to Rule 11 sanctions if we take declarants at their word (especially professors and other highly educated expert witnesses).