April 20, 2026 — Mustafa Suleyman, chief executive of Microsoft AI, recently asserted that artificial intelligence is nearing “human-level performance” on “most, if not all” professional tasks. He predicted that most white-collar work tasks “will be fully automated by an AI within the next 12 to 18 months.” This statement is part of a broader series of forecasts that raises urgent questions for both current and aspiring professionals about the future of work and education.
Legal professionals are often cited as particularly vulnerable to the encroachment of AI. This has led to widespread debate over the relevance of law school in an increasingly automated landscape. Despite the transformative effects of AI, experts believe that a law degree equips graduates with vital human skills that remain essential in a technology-dominated work environment. These skills encompass judgment, interpretation, empathy, critical analysis, ethical reasoning, and negotiation—capabilities that automated systems struggle to replicate.
At the University of Sydney Law School, educators are rethinking the curriculum to prepare graduates for the complexities they will face. The school aims to integrate techno-legal fluency into its core programs. From their ongoing work, they have identified five essential competencies law graduates must adopt in the age of AI.
First, graduates must grasp how different knowledge systems operate and interact. Generative AI (GenAI) does not “read” or “reason” like humans; it analyzes relationships among words based on vast amounts of text, dynamically weighted for task relevance. As AI models become more adept at mimicking logical thought, understanding these systems becomes crucial. Moreover, the interplay between human interactions and AI can subtly reinforce social norms and biases, highlighting the importance of human oversight.
Second, law graduates must comprehend the mechanisms behind AI development—how it is funded, governed, and its societal implications. The development of AI relies heavily on data access, energy resources, and corporate governance frameworks. Understanding these factors enables lawyers to engage in critical discussions about accountability and the public benefits of AI technologies. The unique corporate structures of companies like OpenAI and Anthropic illustrate the intricate relationships between law and technological power.
Third, aspiring lawyers need the ability to assess AI’s practical utility in legal contexts, analyzing its applications and limitations. This involves identifying current and emerging use cases, from document review to legal drafting. Familiarity with various AI models is necessary, as AI is not a monolithic entity. Law schools must expose students to a range of tools, fostering critical comparison rather than brand preference.
Fourth, graduates must recognize evolving responsibilities as AI becomes integrated into legal work. Questions regarding disclosure, verification, and risk management will inevitably change. What should lawyers verify? What assurances are necessary for clients and the courts? These challenges extend beyond practicalities, delving into fairness and access to justice, necessitating a nuanced understanding of how technology impacts diverse groups.
Finally, law graduates must effectively collaborate with individuals possessing varying forms of expertise, including those grounded in lived experiences. The value of a law degree lies not only in technical knowledge but also in fostering human capacities that resist automation, such as empathy and imagination. A strong foundation in legal principles is essential to critically assess AI outputs rather than defer to them without scrutiny.
As the legal profession faces unprecedented changes from AI and automation, the case for legal education becomes even stronger. Societies will increasingly require individuals who can blend legal insight with technological competence and uniquely human attributes. Law schools must focus on preparing graduates who can think critically, adapt to change, collaborate effectively, and act responsibly to ensure that technology serves the public good.
Fleur Johns is dean and head of school at the University of Sydney Law School. Kevin Walton is an associate professor and associate dean (education) at the same institution.
See also
NPL Integrates NVIDIA Ising AI to Automate Quantum Calibration and Enhance Stability
Tesseract Launches Site Manager and PRISM Vision Badge for Job Site Clarity
Affordable Android Smartwatches That Offer Great Value and Features
Russia”s AIDOL Robot Stumbles During Debut in Moscow
AI Technology Revolutionizes Meat Processing at Cargill Slaughterhouse
