Alaska
formalAlaska Bar Association Ethics Opinion 2025-1 (Apr 2025)
Summary
Alaska Bar Association Ethics Opinion 2025-1 addresses competence, confidentiality, billing, supervision, and court-disclosure obligations for attorneys using generative AI. It requires informed client consent before inputting client confidences into AI tools and verification of all AI-generated output. The opinion is advisory and broadly aligned with ABA Formal Opinion 512.
Applicable ABA Model Rules
- Rule 1.1
- Rule 1.2
- Rule 1.3
- Rule 1.4
- Rule 1.5
- Rule 1.6
- Rule 3.1
- Rule 3.3
- Rule 4.1
- Rule 5.1
- Rule 5.3
- Rule 8.4
Carrier Implications
Alaska does not require malpractice insurance, but ALPS is the endorsed carrier active in the state. Firms should validate all AI-generated content, document attorney review, and request written confirmation from carriers at renewal whether the policy covers AI-related errors.
Alaska Bar Association Ethics Opinion 2025-1, adopted April 3, 2025, is the formal Alaska position on generative AI in legal practice. It confirms that AI use is permissible but requires lawyers to understand the tools they use, obtain informed client consent before inputting client confidences into AI tools, verify all AI-generated output, and align billing practices with existing fee rules.
No Alaska state court or D. Alaska federal standing order requires AI disclosure as of 2026-04-23, though individual judges may impose requirements. Alaska SB 2 (comprehensive AI governance) and HB 47 (AI-generated CSAM and deepfakes) are pending; neither directly regulates private law firm AI use.
Bottom line for a 5-50 attorney Alaska firm: Opinion 2025-1 is the controlling guidance. It requires attorneys to understand how generative AI works before using it, obtain informed client consent before inputting client confidences or secrets into a generative AI tool, verify all AI-generated output, and keep billing practices consistent with existing fee rules.
Last verified: April 23, 2026