LexisNexis CEO: AI now core legal infrastructure, like email or word processor
Just last week I watched a junior associate fire up an AI tool to pull together a contract draft, and it felt no different than opening a new email thread. What used to be a handful of pilot projects is now part of the daily grind for many firms and in-house legal teams. Clients are asking for AI-generated research, risk assessments and even quick clause suggestions as routinely as they once asked for a revised memo.
Judges, however, are raising concerns, some fear the unchecked software could spit out wrong citations or miss procedural nuances. LexisNexis has tried to calm the nerves by packaging its own AI suite as a safety net, insisting that its output shouldn’t land anyone in trouble with the bench. Meanwhile, big companies that have already woven AI into their workflows are watching the debate closely, wondering whether the promised speed might erode professional responsibility.
In that context, CEO Sean Fitzpatrick doesn’t mince words about where the industry stands today.
*There isn’t a lawyer today who hasn’t used it , it’s fundamental infrastructure for the legal profession, just like email or a word processor.*
There isn't a lawyer today who hasn't used it -- it's fundamental infrastructure for the legal profession, just like email or a word processor. LexisNexis CEO says the AI law era is already here Sean Fitzpatrick promises his AI won't get you in trouble with a judge. But enterprise companies with huge databases of proprietary information in 2025 can't resist the siren call of AI, and LexisNexis is no different. You'll hear it: when I asked Sean to describe LexisNexis to me, the first word he said wasn't "law" or "data," it was "AI." The goal is for the LexisNexis AI tool, called Protégé, to go beyond simple research, and help lawyers draft the actual legal writing they submit to the court in support of their arguments.
Sean Fitzpatrick, the CEO of LexisNexis, is already talking about AI like it’s as essential as email. He frames the technology as a new layer of legal infrastructure, comparing today’s AI tools to the word processor that once spread through every law office without a second thought. The argument leans on LexisNexis’s long-standing reputation as the default research library for cases and statutes.
Still, moving from a reference database to an AI-driven assistant brings a lot of practical questions to mind. Fitzpatrick assures us the system won’t get a lawyer in trouble with a judge, but the details of that safeguard are pretty vague. He also hints that the whole industry is moving in that direction, yet he offers no numbers to show how many firms have actually plugged the tool into their workflow.
The email analogy suggests a smooth rollout, but the tight regulatory environment around legal practice could make adoption trickier than he implies. In short, LexisNexis is betting on AI as a core tool, but whether it will turn out as ubiquitous and risk-free as the CEO suggests remains unclear.
More in Policy & Regulation
Congress adds energy provisions to defense bill to spur advanced reactors
Why does a defense bill suddenly matter to the power grid? While the National Defense Authorization...
Spain mandates AI‑generated dashboards, reports, and slides be labeled
Spain has moved from discussion to enforcement, demanding transparency for every piece of analysis...
Living policy records bring real‑time AI ethics visibility across departments
The 2026 outlook for AI ethics and governance is shifting from paper‑based rulebooks to dynamic,...
Google Translate adds real‑time speech translation to any headphones
Google’s latest update to its translation service expands the reach of spoken‑language assistance...
After ditching AI fitness apps and a Fitbit, I return to Peloton classes
The surge of AI‑powered workout assistants has turned many home gyms into data‑driven command...
Common Questions Answered
How does LexisNexis CEO Sean Fitzpatrick compare AI to traditional legal tools?
He likens AI to email and word processors, saying it has become fundamental infrastructure for lawyers, just as those tools were adopted without question. This comparison underscores AI's shift from experimental pilots to everyday practice in law firms and corporate legal departments.
What concerns have judges expressed about the increasing use of AI in legal research?
Judges have warned that unchecked AI tools could generate misleading citations or procedural errors, potentially compromising the quality of legal arguments. Their cautions highlight the need for safeguards even as AI becomes more integrated into legal workflows.
Why are enterprise companies reluctant to avoid AI despite potential risks, according to the article?
Enterprise firms possess massive proprietary databases and see AI as a powerful way to leverage that information, making the technology hard to resist. LexisNexis, like other providers, is capitalizing on this demand by offering AI-driven research assistants.
What promise does LexisNexis make regarding the legal safety of its AI products?
Sean Fitzpatrick assures that LexisNexis’s AI will not get users into trouble with a judge, implying built‑in safeguards against inaccurate citations. This pledge aims to address judicial concerns while positioning the AI as a reliable component of legal infrastructure.