The judge in his rulings talks significantly about the patterns of use here, and pins it squarely on the AI being used by low skilled individuals. In particular

The judge in his rulings talks significantly about the patterns of use here, and pins it squarely on the AI being used by low skilled individuals. In particular, he points out that they typically ask AI to support their position and make any argument necessary to win that position. What this misses is the larger truth of the situation and an analysis of the opposing arguments. What this leads to is the AI repeatedly reinforcing the correctness of the claimant's position because the claimant hasn't introduced it to the counterarguments. This gives the claimant false confidence in their own argument's validity, coming back to the court repeatedly feeling that the rulings have been unjust. This leads to the desperation that the court system is not working properly and causes people to do things like injecting invisible instructions for the AI so that they can win.