High Risk, No Reward: Another Reason AI Is a Gamble

You type your employment problem into an AI chatbot without consulting your attorney. You get a confident, detailed response. It feels like legal advice. It is not – and a recent court ruling makes it clear the conversation could be used against you. 

What the Courts Are Saying 

Most recently in United States v. Heppner, the Southern District of New York ruled that consulting a public AI platform – one that is not a licensed attorney and offers no confidentiality protections – cannot satisfy the foundational elements required to establish attorney-client privilege. The ruling reflects a straightforward principle: privilege requires a lawyer and confidentiality. A public AI platform provides neither: inputting sensitive information into a public platform waives any claim to confidentiality. What you share with an AI can be discovered – and used against your business in litigation. 

Why This Matters for Employers 

The ruling in Heppner provides guidance on how AI fails as a confidential resource. HR and business leaders routinely turn to AI for guidance on terminations, investigations, accommodation requests, and disciplinary decisions – often admitting to mistakes or sharing specific employee information, conduct details, and internal deliberations in the process. Under Heppner, those admissions are public and fair game in court. 

The Bottom Line 

Before your next difficult employment decision, consult an employment attorney – we can help. Make sure your managers know the pitfalls too. Privilege exists for a reason – protect it.