Connecticut · state judiciary
The Judicial Branch's use of artificial intelligence
Under Public Act 23-16 the branch inventoried its internal systems and determined that it does not employ artificial intelligence in its applications as that act defines it. The page publishes the branch's AI policies and its committee report. No filing requirement is stated.
Tracker entry · Connecticut
- Court. Connecticut Judicial BranchCOURT
- Level. state judiciaryLEVEL
- Date. policy update January 2024; committee report July 2024DATED
- What it requires. noneREQUIRES
- Source. Read the documentSOURCE
Last checked · we opened the source on that day and drew the requirement above from its text.
Connecticut is in the tracker as a recorded absence, which is worth having. The branch was required by Public Act 23-16 to inventory its internal systems, and it published the result: it does not employ artificial intelligence in its applications as the act defines the term.
The page also links the branch’s policies and procedures concerning AI, a January 2024 policy update presentation and a July 2024 committee report. Nothing on the page we read imposes a disclosure or certification requirement on a filer.
This entry is descriptive, not legal advice. It records what one document says. Read the order that governs your own division before you rely on any of it, and check whether it has changed since the date above.
Back to every jurisdiction in the tracker, or readhow to check an AI citation before you file.