Iowa: AI rules for lawyers

What this means for lawyers

There is no statewide Iowa rule that lawyers must disclose or certify generative AI in a filing. A panel can still order a case-specific explanation, and the Court of Appeals has struck a reply brief, penalised counsel, and dismissed an appeal over fabricated authorities.

Verify every source before you file. The Court of Appeals has said attorneys and self-represented litigants must independently verify the authenticity and veracity of all sources and assertions when they rely on AI tools for trial or appellate filings.

In federal court in Iowa, the joint local rules do not mention AI. The Southern District's website says AI use is not prohibited and disclosure is not required, but each party must verify quotations, citations, and analysis or risk Rule 11 sanctions.

Competence sits in comment [8] to rule 32:1.1 (benefits and risks of relevant technology). No Iowa ethics opinion on generative AI was found. The 2026 chatbot Act regulates operators of public conversational AI services, not a lawyer's ordinary use of a research tool.

As at 31 October 2026.

Telling the court and the client

• Tell the courtVaries by court

  Court disclosure: depends. No statewide rule or formal ethics opinion found requires disclosure or certification. A court may order a statement in a particular case, and the Southern District of Iowa says it may do so if AI becomes a problem in that case. Client disclosure/consent: no rule found. No Iowa ethics opinion interprets the communication or confidentiality rules for generative AI.

  State of Iowa ex rel. J.G. v. Anderson, No. 25-1022

  Sherwin v. State, No. 25-0992

  Artificial Intelligence (AI)

  Iowa Rules of Professional Conduct, chapter 32

  Ethics Advice & Opinions
• Tell the clientNo

  Same basis and sources as above.