Abstract
In his article, ‘Pseudolaw and the illusion of legal meaning’, Joe McIntyre gives an overview of the growing phenomenon of pseudolaw, argues that it shares features with the use of Generative AI in legal settings, and raises concerns about how the interaction of the two might impact legal institutions and processes.
Part One
Purpose: To create a reliable glossary of key legal terminology.
Background: When studying a new area of specialist knowledge, it is important to ensure that you have a clear understanding of the key terminology. It can be helpful to create a glossary of terms, refer to it when necessary, and update it regularly as your studies continue.
Instructions: Create a new document with a narrow column for ‘Terms’ and a wide column for ‘Definitions’. While you are reading the article, identify any significant legal or technical terms and research their definitions. Make sure you focus on their legal meaning, as some words may have different meanings in non-legal contexts. Continue to add to this list as you read the article, or if you continue further reading on the topic.
Hint: You may wish to begin with these terms: jurisdiction, treason, substance, form, layperson, sovereign citizen, legal personality, state sovereignty, esoteric, legal literacy, Generative AI, pareidolia.
Part Two
Purpose: To understand different common forms of pseudolaw.
Background: The article refers to attempts to understand pseudolaw as a set of mistaken arguments and ritualistic behaviours, which may seem ‘legal’ on the surface, but which are not legally effective in substance. Glen Cash (a judge of the District Court of Queensland) has considered how pseudolaw is encountered in the Australian context.
Instructions:
1. Refer to A Kind of Magic: The Origins and Culture of ‘Pseudolaw’, a paper delivered by Cash J to the Queensland Magistrates’ State Conference 2022 https://archive.sclqld.org.au/judgepub/2022/cash20220526.pdf. 2. Working in groups, briefly summarise the following key categories of pseudolaw as they are found in Australia. Explain both the claims made, as well as why they are not legally valid: • Everything is contract and silence means consent • Legal action requires that there be an ‘injured party’ and financial conspiracies • Government authority is defective • The Strawman duality. 3. As a class, share your findings. What do these different categories have in common? What makes people susceptible to believing in pseudolaw? How might we help people avoid falling for pseudolaw arguments and gurus?
Part Three
Purpose: To consider how the lessons of pseudolaw can be applied to Generative AI.
Instructions: Write an extended response to the following prompt: ‘Pseudolaw and Generative AI both demonstrate the danger of relying on form over substance’.