Does ChatGPT Produce Fishy Briefs? When I saw this ABA article on ChatGPT, and whether it could be used to create passable appellate briefs, the first thing I thought of was the NRA ad: "Guns don't kill people, people kill people". The ad was promulgated in support of some who were fighting gun control legislation, and the theme was that guns are tools. It is human beings who use them, for good or ill. In fact, ChatGPT can create the structure of a brief quickly, and can get basics into the text; but, it is the lawyer who applied his or her knowledge and writing ability to create a polished product. No, Virginia, ChatGPT doesn't produce legal briefs, lawyers produce appellate briefs. ChatGPT is a way to put a lot of extraneous language into passable form, and the lawyer then can use it as a base to create something that may or may not be described as "quality". To add to the poor comparison, asking ChatGPT to support the proposition that fish are not bees is begging for a product that is simplistic and ridiculous. What the future WILL bring is a generative AI that can quickly put much knowledge and data on paper, giving the lawyer more time to create something that IS of high quality. Wait and see. No, ChatGPT doesn't create appellate briefs. Lawyers create appellate briefs.