Judge Alison J. Nathan sits on the Second Circuit Court of Appeals

Judge Alison J. Nathan sits on the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, having been elevated from the Southern District of New York in 2022. She's best known for presiding over the Ghislaine Maxwell sex trafficking trial—one of the most high-profile federal cases in recent history. Her move to the appellate bench means she now reviews the work of every district judge in New York, Connecticut, and Vermont, including their handling of AI-related issues.

The Second Circuit has already addressed AI hallucinations head-on. In Park v. Kim, a panel that included then-active circuit judges referred an attorney to the court's Grievance Panel for submitting a brief with a fabricated, ChatGPT-generated case citation. But the Second Circuit deliberately stopped short of issuing a standing AI order, reasoning that existing rules already prohibit the conduct. That philosophical position shapes how every attorney in the circuit should think about AI compliance.

The Park v. Kim Precedent: Second Circuit's Defining AI Moment

In Park v. Kim (2024), attorney Jae S. Lee submitted a reply brief containing a citation to a nonexistent case that she had generated using ChatGPT. The Second Circuit panel identified the fabrication and referred Lee to the court's Grievance Panel for disciplinary proceedings. The referral letter noted that "citation to a non-existent case suggests conduct falling below the basic obligations of counsel." But the panel made a deliberate choice not to issue a circuit-wide AI standing order, reasoning that licensed attorneys already know they must ensure their submissions are accurate under the Federal Rules and Rule 11. This "existing rules are sufficient" approach defines the Second Circuit's philosophy.

What 'No Standing Order' Actually Means for Practitioners

The Second Circuit's decision not to issue an AI standing order is not a green light for unverified AI use. It's the opposite. The court's position is that Rule 11, the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, and existing professional conduct rules already cover AI-related misconduct. A specific AI rule, in the court's view, would be redundant because licensed attorneys should already know they can't submit inaccurate filings. This is a higher standard in practice, not a lower one. If you submit fabricated citations, you can't claim you didn't know AI disclosure was required—the court will say you should have known under existing rules, period.

Judge Nathan's Judicial Profile and Standards

Judge Nathan was appointed to the S.D.N.Y. in 2011 by President Obama and elevated to the Second Circuit in 2022 by President Biden. On the district bench, she handled the Ghislaine Maxwell trial, the Silk Road/Ross Ulbricht case, and other complex federal matters. Her appellate opinions reflect a meticulous approach to legal analysis—she expects the same from the attorneys who appear before her. At the circuit level, Judge Nathan reviews district court decisions across the three-state circuit, including how district judges handle AI-related issues. Her presence on the bench reinforces that the Second Circuit takes accuracy and candor seriously at every level of the federal court system.

Disciplinary Referrals: The Second Circuit's Enforcement Tool

Instead of sanctions, the Second Circuit's primary enforcement mechanism for AI-related misconduct is referral to the Grievance Panel. This is potentially more consequential than a fine. A grievance referral can result in suspension from practice before the Second Circuit, referral to state bar disciplinary authorities, and a permanent mark on the attorney's professional record. In Park v. Kim, the court didn't just correct the error—it initiated a formal disciplinary process. For attorneys filing appellate briefs in the Second Circuit, this means an AI hallucination could result in losing the ability to practice before the court entirely.

Best Practices for Second Circuit Filings

Step 1: Verify every citation in your appellate brief through Westlaw or Lexis before filing. Appellate briefs cite more cases than trial-level filings, increasing hallucination risk. Step 2: Remember that the Second Circuit's "no standing order" position means existing rules apply with full force—ignorance of AI risks is not a defense. Step 3: If you used AI at any stage of brief preparation, conduct a thorough human review of every citation, quotation, and legal argument. Step 4: Consider disclosing AI use voluntarily—while not required, it demonstrates the kind of candor the court values. Step 5: Train your associates and support staff on the Park v. Kim outcome—the Grievance Panel referral is a powerful deterrent that every team member should understand.

The Bottom Line: Before filing in the Second Circuit, verify every citation independently and understand that the absence of an AI standing order makes things harder, not easier. The court's position is that existing rules already prohibit AI fabrications, and enforcement comes through Grievance Panel referrals—not just fines.