Most LNCs Are Using AI to Save Time. The New Federal Rules Are About to Make That a Liability.

Most consultants using AI right now are asking the wrong question. They're asking "does this save me time?" The question that actually matters is: "can I defend this under cross-examination?"

Those are not the same question, and the gap between them is about to get a lot more expensive.

What's actually changing

In June 2025, the Advisory Committee on Evidence Rules approved a new Federal Rule of Evidence — Rule 707 — aimed specifically at machine-generated evidence. The rule is short, and it says exactly what it means: when machine-generated output would be subject to Rule 702 if a human expert had said it instead, the court can only admit it if it independently satisfies Rule 702's reliability requirements. It went through public comment ending in February 2026 and is still moving through the rulemaking process — it isn't binding law yet, but it tells you exactly where federal evidentiary standards are headed, and several courts are already reasoning this way ahead of formal adoption.

There's a companion amendment to Rule 901 on authentication. If AI-generated evidence gets challenged, the burden shifts to whoever's offering it to prove it's more likely than not authentic before it comes in at all.

Translation: the era of "the AI said so" quietly riding into a case unexamined is ending. If it hasn't ended in your jurisdiction yet, it's coming.