“The use of artificial intelligence in the judiciary,” he said softly, each word carefully measured, “isn’t just a matter of efficiency or expediency. It strikes at the very heart of what it means to be human, to have agency, to make choices that shape our collective destiny.”

He turned to the jury, his eyes carrying a fire that seemed to illuminate him from within. “Under 35 U.S.C. § 101, we define what can be protected by patent law. Under 17 U.S.C. § 106, we establish the rights of those who create. But who, I ask you, protects the rights of those affected by these creations?”

The question hung in the air, heavy and suffocating. Roma let the silence stretch, allowing the implications to sink in.

“The algorithms used in Juisys LLC’s judiciary,” he continued, his voice rising with controlled passion, “are protected by patents and copyrights. Their disclosure was never enabled fully to the public, a violation of the trust placed in their creators. But more than that, their very use in such critical decision-making processes undermines the fundamental principles of human dignity and equal justice under the law.”

He moved again, each step a declaration of purpose. “Executive Order 13526, Section 3.4, speaks to the classification of national security information. The Department of Justice asserts that the use of artificial intelligence in the judiciary poses a clear and present threat to the very foundations of our society.”

Roma’s heavy stare found the plaintiff’s table, lingering on each face in turn. “In United States v. Juisys LLC, the court recognized the sanctity of confidentiality agreements. The unauthorized disclosure of proprietary information, as outlined in 17 U.S.C. § 102(a), constitutes a clear violation of intellectual property rights. But the true crime, ladies and gentlemen, goes far beyond mere legal technicalities.”

He paused, his voice dropping to a whisper.