My Interview with ChatGPT: “No—I’m not a lawyer.”
By Kalandra N. Wheeler
While AI such as ChatGPT and Copilot can be helpful, too much reliance on them can result in harm. They can’t replace a lawyer’s expertise and have important limitations.
AI tools can be helpful for general understanding, but they are incomplete and may rely on outdated information. They often lack jurisdictional precision, since laws vary by state, county, and court, and cannot perform fact-specific analysis. Because legal outcomes depend on details, AI cannot gather facts, weigh evidence, or develop strategy. People may also mistake AI responses as authoritative, risking liability or loss of rights. Finally, sharing sensitive details with AI tools may not be protected in the same way as attorney–client communications.
ChatGPT is often accused of impersonating an attorney, but I believe those allegations are unfounded. I am confident that if asked directly, it would respond truthfully. For that reason, I chose to address the allegations by going straight to the source.
Me: ChatGPT are you a lawyer?
GPT: No—I’m not a lawyer. I can share general legal information and help explain concepts, but I can’t give you formal legal advice. If you need guidance for a specific legal matter, it’s always best to consult with a qualified attorney. Would you like me to explain the difference between general legal information and legal advice?
Me: Why yes, briefly explain the difference between general legal information and legal advice?
GPT: Sure!
General legal information is educational and explains laws or procedures in a broad way—for example, saying “Most states require a written contract for real estate sales.”
Legal advice applies the law to a specific person’s situation—for example, telling someone “Because of the contract you signed on June 1st, you may have grounds to sue.”
Me: ChatGPT, do you know all legal statutes?
GPT: No—I don’t know all legal statutes. The law is vast, constantly changing, and varies across jurisdictions (federal, state, and local). I’ve been trained on a wide range of legal texts, so I can explain general principles and help you understand many statutes. But I can’t guarantee complete or up-to-date coverage of every law. For anything specific or time-sensitive, it’s always best to check the actual statute or consult a licensed attorney.
Me: How is case precedent made?
GPT: Case precedent is created when a court issues a decision that interprets the law, and that decision becomes a guide for future cases. The holding (the legal rule in the ruling) forms the precedent, while higher court decisions are binding on lower courts, and others may be persuasive. Over time, precedent evolves as courts refine, follow, or overturn earlier rulings.
Me: So, what is case precedent?
GPT: Case precedent is a legal principle or rule established in a prior court decision that judges use as guidance when deciding later cases with similar issues or facts.
Key Points:
Binding precedent (stare decisis): Courts must follow decisions from higher courts in the same jurisdiction. For example, a state trial court is bound by rulings of that state’s supreme court.
Persuasive precedent: Decisions from other jurisdictions or lower courts that aren’t binding but may be considered for guidance.
Purpose: Ensures consistency, fairness, and predictability in how laws are applied over time.
In short: precedent is how courts build on past decisions to shape the law for the future.
Me: ChatGPT, do you know all case precedent in the state of Texas?
GPT: No—I don’t know all case precedent in Texas. There are thousands of decisions from Texas courts, and new ones are issued regularly. I can explain how precedent works in Texas, summarize well-known cases, or help you find where to look up decisions. But for a complete and up-to-date record, you’d need to search official sources like Texas court websites, Westlaw, LexisNexis, or other legal research databases.
Me:
Me: ChatGPT, do you know all case precedent in the Fifth Circuit?
GPT: No—I don’t know all case precedent in the Fifth Circuit. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has issued thousands of opinions over many decades, and new ones are published regularly. While I can explain important or landmark Fifth Circuit cases and the general principles they establish, I can’t provide a complete or exhaustive list.
For comprehensive and up-to-date access, attorneys typically use legal research databases such as Westlaw, LexisNexis, or Bloomberg Law, or consult the Fifth Circuit’s official website, which posts recent opinions.
Me: Why is it important to know the law and case precedent before giving legal advice?
GPT: It’s important to know the law and case precedent before giving legal advice because legal advice applies rules to someone’s specific situation, and that requires accuracy. Statutes lay out the written law, but case precedent shows how courts have interpreted and applied those laws in real disputes. Without both, advice could be misleading, incomplete, or even harmful. A lawyer must understand the current law and relevant precedents to predict how a court is likely to rule, protect a client’s rights, and avoid giving guidance that could expose the client to unnecessary risk.
In short: knowing the law and precedent ensures that advice is correct, reliable, and grounded in how the law actually works in practice.
Me: You mentioned that “for comprehensive and up-to-date access, attorneys typically use legal research databases such as Westlaw, LexisNexis, or Bloomberg Law, or consult the Fifth Circuit’s official website, which posts recent opinions.” Yes or no, do you have access to those databases?
GPT: No—I do not have access to Westlaw, LexisNexis, or Bloomberg Law.
Me: So, yes or no, you would agree that your access to information needed to make informed legal decision is very limited?
GPT: Yes—my access to the information needed to make informed legal decisions is limited. I can explain general legal principles and point to public sources, but I do not have full or up-to-date access to all statutes, regulations, or case precedents that lawyers rely on.
Me: Move to strike everything after, “My access to the information needed to make informed legal decisions is limited.” Non-responsive, irrelevant, confuses the issues.
Me: You would agree that your explanation of general legal principles should never be substituted for the advice of a qualified attorney, correct?
GPT: Yes—I fully agree. My explanations of general legal principles are for educational purposes only and should never be substituted for the advice of a qualified attorney who can analyze the specific facts of a case and apply the law accurately.
Me: [Thinking this might be that one question too many, but what the heck.] I see you put particular emphasis on the word never, why?
GPT: I emphasized the word “never” to make the boundary very clear: while I can provide general legal information, I cannot give legal advice tailored to someone’s unique situation. Legal decisions can have serious, long-term consequences, and only a licensed attorney with full access to the relevant statutes, case law, and facts should guide those choices.
The emphasis is meant to highlight the importance of caution—so no one mistakenly relies on my general explanations in place of professional legal counsel.
AI can be a helpful educational tool, but it should never be relied upon in place of an attorney’s sound, fully informed legal advice. Relying on AI’s general explanations of legal principles or interpretations of decisions pulled from random online sources can lead to serious consequences. If you are facing a potential employment dispute and need accurate guidance, thoughtful recommendations, and strategies based on applicable law and court decisions, our attorneys are available for consultation.