Articles Posted in Abstracts and Overviews

Abstract

Two different pieces of pending federal legislation share the acronym GUARD Act, but they address technological risks at opposite ends of the age spectrum. The Guidelines for User Age-verification and Responsible Dialogue Act of 2026 (S. 3062) would seek to protect minors from potentially harmful interactions with artificial intelligence chatbots and companions through age verification, access restrictions, disclosures, and other safeguards. The separate Guarding Unprotected Aging Retirees from Deception Act (H.R. 2978/S. 2544) would strengthen law enforcement capabilities to investigate increasingly sophisticated financial fraud affecting older Americans, including schemes involving artificial intelligence and cryptocurrency. Neither proposal has yet been enacted into federal law. Examining the two measures together highlights both their potential benefits and their possible unintended consequences, including questions involving privacy, cybersecurity, parental authority, access to beneficial AI technologies, digital inclusion, and civil liberties. Their contrasting approaches also raise a broader question likely to become increasingly important as artificial intelligence permeates everyday life: How can society protect people who may be particularly vulnerable to emerging technologies without unnecessarily limiting their ability to benefit from those same technologies?

Introduction

Introduction

Social Security’s long term financial outlook has again moved to the forefront with the release of the Congressional Budget Office’s 2026 long term projections and the Social Security Trustees’ latest annual assessment. Although the reports differ in methodology and some of their estimates, they point to the same fundamental challenge: under current law, the gap between Social Security’s scheduled benefits and the revenues available to finance them is projected to persist and generally widen over the decades ahead. This article examines the findings of CBO and the Trustees, supplemented by analysis from J.P. Morgan Asset Management, with particular attention to the projected depletion of trust fund reserves, the distinction between scheduled and payable benefits, the demographic and economic forces contributing to the financing gap, and what these projections actually mean, and do not mean, for the future of Social Security.

CBO’s 2026 Long Term Projections for Social Security

Europe’s legal artificial intelligence market may be entering a new stage of development. Italian legal AI provider Lexroom has made its first acquisitions, purchasing France based Query Juriste and Bulgaria based Praven Intelekt. The transactions extend Lexroom’s operations into five European countries and illustrate one possible strategy for building legal AI systems across jurisdictions whose laws, legal sources, languages, and professional practices differ substantially.

The acquisitions were announced on September 8, 2026. Artificial Lawyer characterized them as Lexroom’s first expansion through acquisitions, following its earlier organic entry into Germany and Spain. Together with its home market of Italy, the additions of France and Bulgaria give the company a presence in five European legal markets.

The developments also offer a useful window into the evolution of legal AI beyond the United States, particularly in a European market where technology increasingly crosses borders while law and authoritative legal information remain strongly jurisdiction specific.

Introduction

The closely watched Massachusetts murder trial of Lindsay Clancy ended on September 4, 2026, not with a verdict, but with a mistrial after jurors reported that they could not reach unanimous agreement. The result leaves unresolved one of the most difficult questions presented to a criminal jury: when severe mental illness is established, at what point does that illness eliminate criminal responsibility for otherwise intentional acts?

Clancy was charged in connection with the January 24, 2023 deaths of her three children, Cora, Dawson, and Callan Clancy, at the family’s home in Duxbury, Massachusetts. At trial, the central dispute was not whether Clancy had caused the children’s deaths. Instead, the case largely turned on her mental condition and whether the Commonwealth proved that she was criminally responsible when the killings occurred.

Introduction

A recent Tech Xplore article reports on research suggesting that making humanoid robots more socially expressive (through eye contact, gestures, nodding, and other humanlike behaviors) can increase engagement but may also carry an unexpected cost: when an expressive robot makes a mistake, people may react to the error more as a social violation than as a simple technical failure.

The article, “A Humanoid Robot’s Social Expressiveness May Backfire When It Makes Mistakes,” was written by Ingrid Fadelli and published by Tech Xplore/Phys.org on August 28, 2026, with editing by Robert Egan. It reports on research conducted principally by investigators at Drexel University and published in Science Robotics. The underlying study, by Yigit Topoglu and colleagues, is titled “Multilevel Dynamics of the Brain, Hormones, Mind, and Behavior in Social Human-Robot Interaction.” The following is an overview of the two articles:

Congressional Budget Office (CBO) final report, August  28,2026.*

CBO reports annually on programs whose authorizations of appropriations have already expired or will expire. This report updates CBO’s preliminary report that was released on January 15, 2026.

SUMMARY:

Overview

In his August 26, 2026 essay, “The Turbulent AI Era Is Here. The Choices We Make Now Are Critical,” Bill Gates presents artificial intelligence as a technological transition potentially different in important respects from earlier waves of automation. AI can increasingly perform cognitive work, can spread rapidly through technologies and infrastructure already in widespread use, and can be accessed through ordinary language without requiring users to master specialized computer skills. Gates is not arguing against AI. On the contrary, he remains strongly optimistic about its potential in medicine, education, agriculture, scientific research, government services, clean energy, and assistance for people who otherwise lack access to specialized expertise. His concern is that these benefits will not necessarily be distributed fairly and that significant social and economic disruption could accompany them.

Gates identifies three major categories of concern:

Introduction

Artificial intelligence policy has often been characterized as a contest between those urging rapid innovation and those seeking greater regulation. A recently released statement entitled Pacing the Frontier suggests that this characterization may no longer be sufficient.

Signed by more than one thousand researchers and employees from leading AI organizations (including OpenAI, Anthropic, Google DeepMind, Meta, Microsoft, Amazon, and others) the statement does not advocate halting AI research. Instead, it urges governments to help develop the technical and institutional mechanisms needed to ensure that future advances remain under meaningful human oversight.

FROM THE LAW LIBRARY AT THE WASHINGTON AND  LEE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW:

The 2025 W&L Law Journal Rankings are now available!

Released on July 15, 2026, the 2025 Rankings provide citation data and calculated ranks for the top 400 U.S.-published law journals and the top 100 law journals published outside the United States. Journals ranked below these thresholds display “NR” (Not Ranked) for each data category and are listed alphabetically. The survey span of the 2025 ranking is five years (2021-2025). For more information about the new and previous rankings, please see our Methodology page.

Contact Information