Maryland hasn't issued formal AI guidance for attorneys, despite being home to nearly 25,800 lawyers and sitting next to the most regulated legal market in the country. The Maryland State Bar Association published an informational article on AI ethics in May 2024, but no binding opinion or rules have followed.
AI Regulation in Maryland: The Current Landscape
Maryland's AI regulatory landscape is thin for a state of its size and legal sophistication. The Maryland State Bar Association published an article in May 2024 highlighting ethical concerns involving AI for lawyers, but that's where the formal activity ends. No ethics opinion, no task force report, no court rules.
This is surprising given Maryland's profile. The state ranks 19th in population, has roughly 25,800 licensed attorneys, and its major markets — Baltimore, Bethesda, Rockville, and Annapolis — include firms that handle federal government work, regulatory compliance, and complex litigation. These are exactly the practice areas where AI adoption is moving fastest.
Maryland's proximity to D.C. creates an additional wrinkle. Many Maryland attorneys also practice in D.C. or handle matters that touch federal agencies. The D.C. Bar has its own AI guidance, and federal courts in the region have been active on AI disclosure requirements. Maryland attorneys are navigating a patchwork environment without state-specific direction.
What the Maryland Bar Says About AI
The Maryland State Bar Association's May 2024 article is the only official publication addressing AI ethics for lawyers. The article highlighted ethical concerns but stopped short of providing specific guidance, interpretive opinions, or recommended practices. It's educational, not directive.
No formal ethics opinion number has been issued. No AI task force or working group has been publicly announced. This means Maryland attorneys can't cite a state-specific opinion when justifying their AI practices or building compliance frameworks.
The gap is notable when compared to neighboring jurisdictions. New Jersey issued Supreme Court Preliminary Guidelines in January 2024. Virginia has addressed AI through bar guidance. D.C. has its own framework. Maryland sits in the middle of active jurisdictions without its own position, leaving its attorneys to borrow from neighbors.
Court Rules and Judicial Guidance
Maryland courts haven't issued AI-specific standing orders, local rules, or judicial guidance as of April 2026. There are no reported AI-related disciplinary cases or sanctions in the state.
Attorneys should pay attention to federal courts in Maryland, which operate under their own rules. The District of Maryland (federal) may adopt AI disclosure requirements independently of the state court system, as many federal districts have done nationwide.
Practical Implications for Maryland Attorneys
For Maryland attorneys, the lack of formal guidance creates a compliance gray zone. You're expected to use AI competently and ethically under existing rules, but you don't have a state-specific interpretation of what that means. The May 2024 article flagged concerns but didn't resolve them.
The multi-jurisdictional reality makes this more complex. A Bethesda attorney handling D.C. matters, a Baltimore firm doing federal regulatory work, and a Rockville practitioner with Virginia clients all face different AI rules depending on the jurisdiction. Without Maryland-specific guidance, there's no home-base framework to anchor to.
Firms doing government-adjacent work face particular urgency. Federal agencies are developing their own AI policies rapidly, and attorneys advising those agencies need to demonstrate AI competence. Maryland's silence doesn't exempt attorneys from the competence expectations that clients and courts are already applying.
What Attorneys in Maryland Should Do
Build your AI policy using Maryland's existing Rules of Professional Conduct as the foundation, supplemented by guidance from neighboring jurisdictions. New Jersey's Preliminary Guidelines (January 2024) and the D.C. Bar's AI guidance are strong reference points for Maryland attorneys given the geographic and professional overlap.
If your practice crosses state lines — and in the Baltimore-D.C. corridor, it almost certainly does — map the AI requirements of every jurisdiction you practice in. Maryland's silence doesn't override the disclosure requirements or ethical obligations of other states and federal courts where you appear.
Push the Maryland State Bar Association for action. A state with nearly 26,000 attorneys and major legal markets needs more than an informational article. Participate in bar committees, submit questions to the ethics hotline about AI-specific scenarios, and advocate for a formal opinion. The absence of guidance isn't serving Maryland lawyers well.
The Bottom Line
Maryland's silence on AI regulation is a missed opportunity for a state with a large, sophisticated bar. The May 2024 article was a start, but attorneys in the Baltimore-D.C. corridor need real guidance — not just awareness of the issues.
AI-Assisted Research. This piece was researched and written with AI assistance, reviewed and edited by Manu Ayala. For deeper takes and the perspective behind the research, follow me on LinkedIn or email me directly.