Your college-aged child uses an AI app to conduct in-depth research for their term paper. Your neighbor asks ChatGPT to plan a month’s worth of meals. Your friends share AI-generated images of their pets as medieval knights. Your colleague clones their voice for work presentations.
AI tools have become as pervasive as photo filters and meme apps, and for good reason. They’re accessible, often free or low-cost, and can be genuinely useful for creative expression or work presentations.
The challenge arises when legal issues are in question, especially in family law matters, where custody decisions, alimony arrangements, and restraining order proceedings are at stake.
Common types of AI-generated evidence
When AI-generated content shows up in family law cases, it likely falls into one of a few different categories. Each one creates challenges for courts and attorneys trying to determine what is really taking place.
Deepfake videos
Deepfake technology utilizes artificial intelligence to create realistic videos in which someone appears to say or do things they never actually did. The technology requires only existing photos and video clips to work with, content that most people have readily available across social media platforms.
Deepfakes present particular concerns in family law because they can be emotionally manipulative and deliberately misrepresentative. For example, a fabricated video appearing to show threatening behavior towards an ex can sway the feelings of juries or judges, even if the content is entirely fabricated.
AI-generated texts, emails, or social posts
AI tools can write messages that mimic someone’s speech patterns, commonly used phrases, punctuation preferences, and emoji usage. The result is text messages or emails that appear genuine but contain content the person never actually wrote.
These fabricated messages often include authentic-looking details, such as proper timestamp formatting and message threading, making them difficult to distinguish from legitimate communications.
Edited images and documents
AI-powered photo editing capabilities do much more than the basic image filters of the 2010s. Current technology can modify images by adding or removing people, changing backgrounds, or altering financial documents. In custody proceedings, this might involve fabricated images suggesting unsafe living conditions or inappropriate behavior. Financial disputes could involve altered bank statements or tax documents.
Voice imitation recordings
Voice cloning technology can create audio recordings that replicate someone’s speech using only a few minutes of sample audio. These synthetic recordings might contain admissions, threats, or statements that could significantly impact parenting time decisions or restraining order proceedings. They can lead to serious outcomes for both the parties and the involved children.
Legal challenges in authenticating AI-generated evidence
The legal system is still playing catch-up to AI technology. Traditional methods for verifying evidence weren’t designed to detect AI-generated content, creating unforeseen challenges for courts and attorneys.
Authentication typically relies on witness testimony and metadata analysis. However, AI-generated evidence can include fake metadata and may not possess traditional authentication markers. Courts are now facing evidence that looks completely authentic but may be entirely fabricated.
New Jersey courts, like those across the country, are developing procedures to combat these issues. Judges are increasingly requiring technical experts to verify digital evidence, especially when disputes arise regarding authenticity. This process can add time and expense to family law proceedings, but it’s becoming necessary to ensure fair outcomes. This is burdensome when financials are limited for both parties, but, more concerning, when one party is limited in access to funds.
The burden of proof is also shifting. Previously, questioning the authenticity of a video or document required compelling reasons. Now, attorneys may need to proactively verify digital evidence to prevent manufactured evidence from influencing court decisions.
Legal measures taken to combat AI-generated evidence in family law cases
If this all sounds overwhelming, here’s some reassurance: courts and lawmakers are paying attention. The challenge is that legal systems move deliberately, while technology advances at a rapid pace. Still, meaningful steps are being taken.
New Jersey’s deepfake law
In April 2025, New Jersey became one of the latest states to set criminal penalties for creating or distributing deceptive AI-generated content. The law includes penalties of up to five years in prison and fines of up to $30,000, with civil remedies available for victims.
While not specific to family law, this legislation applies to cases where deepfakes are used for harassment, extortion, or other criminal purposes.
Federal evidence rule discussions
The U.S. Judicial Conference’s Advisory Committee on Evidence Rules is considering amendments to address the use of AI-generated evidence. Proposed changes include new authentication requirements and standards for machine-generated content, though these changes are still under development and haven’t been finalized.
Enhanced scrutiny in courts
Individual judges are beginning to require more rigorous authentication of digital evidence when authenticity is questioned. Some courts are demanding detailed information about how digital evidence was created, stored, and obtained, particularly when there are credible disputes about authenticity.
Emerging expert witness requirements
Although not yet standardized, courts are increasingly turning to technical experts to help authenticate digital evidence when AI manipulation is suspected. These forensic specialists can utilize sophisticated detection tools and analysis methods to identify signs of artificial generation or manipulation.
The challenge is that the legal system is still struggling to keep pace with rapidly advancing technology. Most existing protections focus on criminal harassment or election-related deepfakes rather than the specific evidential challenges that arise in family law cases.
Tips for protecting yourself against AI-generated evidence
While you can’t control whether someone attempts to use fabricated evidence against you, there are steps you can take to protect yourself, though the limitations on these methods in combating AI generated evidence is still a concern:
- Document your communications carefully: Keep detailed records of your digital communications, including timestamps, device information, and original files. Save communications in their original format whenever possible, rather than taking screenshots.
- Maintain digital trails: Use platforms that provide verification features, such as read receipts or delivery confirmations. These offer additional layers of authentication that are harder to fabricate and create useful metadata breadcrumbs if it’s necessary to analyze communications.
- Carefully monitor your digital activity: Limit the amount of audio, video, and text content available online that could be used to create AI-generated evidence. This includes being thoughtful about social media posts, video calls, and voice messages, especially if you’re involved in a high-conflict divorce, child custody, or support case.
- Work with experienced legal counsel: An attorney familiar with digital evidence can help you understand authentication requirements and counter false evidence and accusations.
- Preserve original devices and accounts: Keep devices, social media accounts, and email accounts active during legal proceedings. This allows for forensic analysis that can verify the authenticity of communications.
When it comes down to it, AI technology has changed how evidence is handled in family law cases, but it’s not changing the fundamental goal: reaching fair resolutions that protect everyone involved.
Contact our team to coordinate your strategy planning session to discuss any concerns about how AI may intersect with your family law matter.
