Skip to content

Session Expired

Your session has expired. Please sign in again to continue where you left off.

Sign In Again

PA HR331: Recognizing the exclusive constitutional authority of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court to regulate the practice of law in this Commonwealth and urging …

In Committee Pennsylvania

Last verified Oct 16, 2026 · official bill text

HR331 · where it stands

1 of 5 steps complete
  1. Introduced In committee
  2. Passed first chamber
  3. Passed both chambers
  4. Enacted
  5. Effective
What do these statuses mean?
Introduced
Filed in the legislature; may be waiting for a committee hearing.
Passed a chamber
Approved by one or both chambers; awaiting further action.
Enacted
Signed into law, or became law without a signature or over a veto.
Effective date
The date the law says it takes effect. Once it has passed, the page shows "Effective" and the date. A court order can still block a law; if we know of one, the summary says so.
Dead / vetoed
Vetoed, failed, or the session ended without action.
View full title

Recognizing the exclusive constitutional authority of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court to regulate the practice of law in this Commonwealth and urging the Court to adopt safeguards governing the use of artificial intelligence by attorneys and judges.

In one paragraph

Pennsylvania's HR 331 (2025-26) is a House resolution, so it would not change the law. It would recognize the Pennsylvania Supreme Court's exclusive authority to regulate the practice of law and urge the Court to adopt rules on AI use by attorneys and judges, such as signed certifications that legal citations were verified and required AI training. It was referred to the House Judiciary Committee on September 29, 2025.

Plain-English summary, written with AI assistance. The official text controls.

What it means for business

No duties for businesses. The resolution is not law; it only urges the state Supreme Court to adopt AI safeguards for attorneys and judges.

Key provisions

  1. Resolution only; it does not create or change any law and would only urge the Supreme Court to act
  2. Would recognize the Supreme Court's exclusive constitutional authority to regulate the practice of law
  3. Would urge a signed attorney certification that all legal authorities in a filing were personally reviewed and verified
  4. Would urge classifying citation of false, fabricated or unverifiable AI-generated authorities as malpractice or professional misconduct
  5. Would urge AI risk and ethics training in continuing legal education and specialized AI education for judges
  6. Would urge escalating disciplinary penalties, up to suspension or disbarment, for repeated harmful misuse of AI by attorneys or judges
  7. Referred to the House Judiciary Committee on September 29, 2025

Latest legislative action

Sep 29, 2025. Referred to Judiciary

Sponsors (showing 5 of 56)

NameRole
R Primary
Primary
D Primary
Primary
D Cosponsor

Roll call votes

House Resolution 331 Apr 10, 2024

101 yea99 nay2 other

Committee vote (Tourism & Economic & Recreational Development): Report Bill As Committed Mar 25, 2024

25 yea0 nayPassed

Topics and industries

Affected industries

This page is general information, not legal advice. Summaries are AI-assisted and may contain errors; read the statute for the controlling text and talk to a lawyer about your situation. Full disclaimer · Report an error