New Jersey appears poised to become the next state to explicitly add a duty of technology competence to its professional code of ethics. Proposed revisions to the New Jersey Rules of Professional Conduct would, if adopted, make New Jersey the forty-first state to include technology competence among the many other professional competencies a modern lawyer is expected to possess.
Under consideration in New Jersey are proposals to revise the state’s lawyer ethics regulations in two respects. The first would require lawyers to obtain at least one technology-related credit as part of their continuing legal education obligations. The proposal states:
Within each two-year CLE reporting cycle, New Jersey attorneys should be required to earn at least one CLE credit in technology-related legal subjects out of the five required ethics credits, including but not limited to artificial intelligence, cybersecurity, and emerging technologies.
A 2024 report from the New Jersey State Bar Association’s Task Force on Artificial Intelligence (AI) and the Law recommended that an AI-related CLE requirement be included in a new “Ethics, Diversity, and Technology” mandate.
The second proposed change would align New Jersey with the vast majority of other jurisdictions by adding a comment to RPC 1.1 (“Competence”) directing lawyers to monitor changes in legal practice methods and to be mindful of both the risks and benefits of technology. The proposed comment reads:
To maintain competence, a lawyer should keep abreast of changes in the law and its practice, including the benefits and risks associated with relevant technology, engage in continuing study and education, and comply with all continuing legal education requirements to which the lawyer is subject.
The new language follows the approach the American Bar Association introduced the idea of technology competence in 2012 when it revised Comment 8 to the ABA Model Rule of Professional Conduct 1.1 (Competence) to note that “a lawyer should keep abreast of changes in the law and its practice, including the benefits and risks associated with relevant technology.” Since then dozens of states have followed suit by revising their lawyer ethics codes to acknowledge the role of technology in modern law practice and insist that lawyers appreciate both the benefits – and the dangers – to clients posed by technology innovations and cyberthreats.
Hawaii is the most recent state to adopt a duty of technology competence, amending the Hawaii Rules of Professional Conduct in 2021. It should be pointed out, however, that the familiar observation that 40 states have adopted the ethical duty of technology competence is misleading. In 2025, and probably for quite a while now, given the way that technology permeates modern life and legal practice, only the most reckless lawyers would assume they do not have an ethical duty of technology competence, regardless of jurisdiction.
For example, the District of Columbia’s professional ethics code nowhere mentions a duty of technology competence. Yet in Ethics Opinion 371, addressing the use of social media in law practice, the District of Columbia Bar Ethics Committee said it agreed with Comment 8 to ABA Model Rule 1.1. “Because of society’s embrace of technology, a lawyer’s ignorance or disregard of it, including social media, presents a risk of ethical misconduct,” the committee wrote.
For a summary of the many ways that lawyers can violate ethical standards when using technology, the article It’s 2024, Are You Technology Competent? (PDF) is a good place to start. Massachusetts Board of Bar Overseers attorney Heather L. LaVigne collects court rulings and disciplinary actions arising from lawyer misuse of a wide variety of technology-infused circumstances: electronic filing, electronic discovery, security of client confidential information and client funds, and – closer to home – misbehavior during remote deposition. The professional obligation to competently handle technology is not a new one.
CLE Mandates, Educational Outreach Takes Root
Regarding professional education, New Jersey would not be the first jurisdiction to add technology training to professional education mandates. Florida, North Carolina, and New York have all mandated technology credits to their lawyers’ annual CLE obligations in recent years.
These early technology education initiatives tended to prioritize cybersecurity-related topics, though lately, state-bar educators have been zeroing in on artificial intelligence as a critical focus area. The Florida Bar’s Special Committee on AI Tools & Resources published Jan. 7 The Florida Bar Guide to Getting Started With AI, is an explainer that covers popular AI technologies, common use cases, and potential ethical pitfalls for lawyers. New Jersey courts have been actively considering the policy implications of artificial intelligence and other emerging technologies, publishing last year a resource page collecting AI-related proposals and preliminary guidance for judges and lawyers.
The New Jersey Supreme Court published Legal Practice: Preliminary Guidelines on the Use of Artificial Intelligence by New Jersey Lawyers (PDF) in 2024. The document summarizes a lawyer’s ethical obligations when using generative artificial intelligence tools to deliver client services.
The ABA Task Force on Law and Artificial Intelligence’s August 2024 report, Addressing the Legal Challenges of AI (PDF), is another example of bar leadership attempting to get the word out on the sweeping implications of AI in law practice. The ABA report also documents the many educational programs that the organization has offered for lawyers in this area.
The comment period on the proposed revisions to New Jersey’s lawyer ethics rules closed Dec. 20. The notice soliciting comments indicated that comments could be made public, though none have been published as yet.
