# kaal:claim:5541658-026

**Claim.** Regulation of legal AI faces a two sided failure: strict regimes such as the EU AI Act may stifle innovation, while lenient approaches such as the United States risk leaving biases unchecked.

**Type.** failure  **Support.** argued

**Holds when.**

- comparative regulation of AI in legal and judicial settings

**Source quote.**

> Strict regulations, like the EU AI Act, may stifle innovation, while lenient approaches, like in the U.S., risk unchecked biases.

**From.** Wulf A. Kaal, Morgan A. Gray, *The Evolving Role of Artificial Intelligence in Law* (2025), Challenges in Regulation, page 30

**Cite as.** Wulf A. Kaal, Morgan A. Gray, The Evolving Role of Artificial Intelligence in Law (2025). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=5541658

**Verify.** sha256 of source PDF `e543a2d698fcd522d4d02e034cc9ee1344d0015d2c824b40b9e05ab7c0728c60` at https://raw.githubusercontent.com/wulfkaal/Academic-Papers/main/papers/pdf/Kaal%20and%20Gray%20-%202025%20-%20The%20Evolving%20Role%20of%20Artificial%20Intelligence%20in%20Law.pdf

**Failure mode.** innovation versus ethics regulatory tradeoff  (family: innovation-chilling)

**Topics.** innovation, ai-and-agents

**Keywords.** regulation, innovation-tradeoff, eu-ai-act, bias

**Canonical form.** This markdown file is the canonical hashed representation of the claim. Its sha256 is the content hash used for attestation.