You have to be jacked to use the jackhammer.

University of Chicago's policy is more interesting: https://www.law.uchicago.edu/news/ai-strategy-statement

> AI use is prohibited for any use for any purpose in any exam situation.

Read literally this bans the use of hearing aids in an oral examination. All the devices on the market today use noise reduction based on neural networks or transformers. Isn't that AI? (The manufacturers' ad copy certainly insists so.) Presumably not what they intended but "AI" is not defined in the document.

Law is so ripe for replacement by AI. It is entirely based on established written arguments with gray areas, edge cases, linguistic subtleties, etc., being the crux upon which many controversial decisions are drawn. That is, law arguments are based on a mastery of language coupled with knowledge of legal precedent. LLMs are extremely good at linguistic reasoning and can be trained on ever legal case every published.

> AI can be used for research on papers ONLY for the limited purpose of identifying sources, such as cases, statutes, or secondary sources. Students are responsible for the accuracy of their research and all other aspects of their submitted work.

Absolutely level-headed policy. Whoever came up with this deserves some serious praise.