The AI Polylemma in Legal Education, NLSIU

The JSW Centre for the Future of Law at NLSIU is organising a special online academic session titled “The AI Polylemma in Legal Education” as part of its Working Paper Series. The presentation will be delivered by Dr. Rahul Hemrajani, Assistant Professor and Faculty Director at NLSIU, and is open to the public.

This session explores one of the most urgent questions facing modern law schools – how generative artificial intelligence is reshaping legal education and whether it can truly be regulated, banned, or meaningfully controlled.

Event Details

• Mode: Online
• Date: Monday, 29 December 2025
• Time: 4:00 PM IST
• Access: Open to all
• Registration: Available through the official JSW Centre registration link

About the Speaker – Dr. Rahul Hemrajani

• Assistant Professor, NLSIU
• Faculty Director, JSW Centre for the Future of Law
• Teaching at NLSIU since 2023
• Research focus:
  • Empirical studies of law and judicial processes
  • Artificial Intelligence in law and legal education
  • Contemporary legal pedagogy and institutional reform

Theme of the Working Paper

“The AI Polylemma in Legal Education: Why Law Schools Cannot Ban, Permit, or Regulate Their Way Out of Generative AI”

Dr. Hemrajani introduces the concept of a “polylemma” – a situation where every policy choice is both necessary and deeply flawed.

Key Issues Discussed in the Paper

• Generative AI is unavoidable in modern legal practice and education
• AI use enhances professional efficiency, but
• It also erodes core analytical and reasoning skills traditionally developed in law school
• Banning AI is unrealistic
• Redesigning assessments is insufficient to curb dependence on AI
• Regulation alone cannot solve the problem

Research Methodology

The paper is based on empirical research conducted at a leading Indian law school, including:

• Student surveys
• Focus group discussions
• Faculty and student interviews

These methods provide real-world evidence on how students are already integrating AI into learning and assessments.

The Central Argument

• Law schools are trapped in a contradiction:
  • They must train students for an AI-driven profession
  • Yet they must also preserve independent reasoning and intellectual rigour
• These objectives cannot be fully reconciled under current pedagogical models
• As a result, no coherent strategy exists that avoids sacrificing either:
  • Professional competence, or
  • Academic integrity

The Way Forward

The paper concludes that legal education has reached a critical inflection point. Incremental reform is no longer enough. What is required is:

• Fundamental rethinking of:
  • Teaching goals
  • Assessment methods
  • The very identity of legal professionals in the AI age