Eugene Volokh, First Amendment law professor at UCLA, joins Hoover senior fellows Niall Ferguson and John Cochrane to discuss free speech in the Information Age, the Supreme Court ruling on affirmative action, corrupt practices in college admissions, challenges of the United Nations, rearming after a future war, dress code and tipping in politics, and the difference between historians and amateurs.

In this insightful discussion, Eugene Volokh, a legal scholar specializing in constitutional law and free speech, tackles the complex issue of AI-generated defamation. He explores the implications of libel laws in the age of AI, questioning how courts might handle statements made by tools like ChatGPT. The conversation dives into potential legal responsibilities for developers, malice definitions, and whether lawsuits or regulations are the answer. Volokh emphasizes the need for accountability in AI while navigating the challenges of free speech and emerging technology.

Constitutional law expert David Super discusses Justice Alito's controversial refusal to recuse. First Amendment expert Eugene Volokh talks about the Supreme Court ruling in favor of the NRA. Erin Bryan analyzes a Supreme Court ruling on Bank of America's escrow accounts. Hosted by June Grasso.

Former federal prosecutor Robert Mintz discusses Trump's defense in the civil fraud trial, while First Amendment expert Eugene Volokh talks about the prosecution of men accused of robocalls with false information to Black voters. They explore defense strategy, witness recall, the contentious relationship between defense attorneys and the judge, robocalls' legality, AI in business, voter privacy concerns, and challenges to laws against robocalls in the political context.

If someone lies about you, you can usually sue them for defamation. But what if that someone is ChatGPT? Already in Australia, the mayor of a town outside Melbourne has threatened to sue OpenAI because ChatGPT falsely named him a guilty party in a bribery scandal. Could that happen in America? Does our libel law allow that? What does it even mean for a large language model to act with "malice"? Does the First Amendment put any limits on the ability to hold these models, and the companies that make them, accountable for false statements they make? And what's the best way to deal with this problem: private lawsuits or government regulation?On this episode of Arbiters of Truth, our series on the information ecosystem, Alan Rozenshtein, Associate Professor of Law at the University of Minnesota and Senior Editor at Lawfare, discussed these questions with First Amendment expert Eugene Volokh, Professor of Law at UCLA and the author of a draft paper entitled "Large Libel Models.”Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.