Official documentation
Formal Opinion 512: Generative Artificial Intelligence Tools
ABA Standing Committee on Ethics and Professional Responsibility, American Bar Association, 2024
Read the originalRead on October 17, 2026
- What it is
- The American Bar Association's first ethics opinion on lawyers' use of generative AI tools. It applies the confidentiality duty in Model Rule 1.6 to tools that learn from the information users enter, and says when a client's informed consent is needed.
- How much weight it carries
- Official ABA opinion, advisory rather than binding, and state bars apply it in their own ways. The ABA's own site blocks automated access, so this copy is an archived snapshot of the official PDF, read on 2026-10-17.
Facts taken from this source
- ABA Formal Opinion 512 says a general clause in an engagement letter is not enough to obtain the informed consent needed before using generative AI with client information.
“merely adding general, boiler-plate provisions to engagement letters purporting to authorize the lawyer to use GAI is not sufficient” (Section B, Confidentiality)
- ABA Formal Opinion 512 says lawyers must make reasonable efforts to prevent inadvertent or unauthorized disclosure of, or unauthorized access to, information relating to a client's representation.
“reasonable efforts to prevent the inadvertent or unauthorized disclosure of, or unauthorized access to, information relating to the representation of the client” (Section B, Confidentiality)
- ABA Formal Opinion 512 says that self-learning AI tools, by their nature, raise the risk that one client's information is disclosed to others.
“by their very nature, raise the risk that information relating to one client’s representation may be disclosed improperly” (Section B, Confidentiality)