In the fast-evolving realm of legal technology, the integration of Generative AI (GenAI) tools into the practice of law has surged, bringing with it both unprecedented benefits and significant risks. Despite its growing prevalence, a surprising number of attorneys remain either unaware of or indifferent to the potential pitfalls associated with GenAI, such as the creation of fictitious legal cases or the inadvertent breach of client confidentiality. This gap in knowledge and the subsequent missteps have even led to professional sanctions, highlighting a crucial disconnect in the legal community’s understanding of GenAI.

The question then arises: Is it time for mandatory Continuing Legal Education (CLE) focused specifically on GenAI for lawyers? While some may view this as an unnecessary addition to the already hefty load of professional requirements, a closer look at the facts suggests otherwise. Technological competence is increasingly becoming intertwined with legal competence. With over 39 states in the US mandating that lawyers stay updated on the benefits and risks of relevant technology, the precedent for such specialized training already exists.

Taking into account the ubiquity and potential disruptions caused by GenAI, segregating it from general tech training becomes not just beneficial but necessary. Daily, lawyers face fines and embarrassment for errors caused by uncritical reliance on GenAI. Moreover, the misuse of these tools can jeopardize client confidentiality and even result in the waiver of privileges. On the other hand, properly harnessed GenAI can revolutionize practice efficiency and client service, suggesting a profound need for targeted educational initiatives.

A well-designed mandatory CLE on GenAI could demystify how large language models (LLMs) and other AI systems function, what they can and cannot do, and the critical importance of verifying AI-generated information. Such a course could also guide lawyers on how to ethically and effectively integrate GenAI tools into their practice, ensuring both compliance and competitiveness in a digital age.

Despite potential objections—such as the cost of development, possible vendor biases, and the challenge of engaging an already CLE-weary legal community—the benefits of such a program could vastly outweigh the risks. Not only would it standardize a baseline level of tech competence among lawyers, but it would also reinforce the seriousness with which the profession should approach GenAI.

The rapid pace of technological change will not slow, and neither can the legal profession’s response to it. Implementing mandatory GenAI training isn’t just about preventing sanctions or malpractice claims; it’s about reshaping the legal landscape and ensuring that lawyers are not just competent, but proficient in the tools that will define modern legal practice. As GenAI tools continue to permeate all aspects of litigation and client interaction, readiness isn't just advisable—it's imperative.