TL;DR: On May 28, 2026, the Florida Supreme Court issued SC2026-0673 amending Florida Rule of General Practice and Judicial Administration 2.515(d)(2) to require the signer of every filing to certify that the legal authorities cited exist and are accurately cited. The amendments become effective June 15, 2026 at 12:01 a.m. and authorize sanctions for filings that do not comply. The change replaces a patchwork of circuit orders with a uniform statewide standard, and the Florida e-filing portal has begun surfacing AI-citation certification reminders to practitioners as of mid to late July 2026. For trial teams, the development imposes enhanced due diligence on AI-assisted drafting, citation verification, and the presentation of authorities in litigation documents. Objection Academy can support this transition by training lawyers and staff to identify, verify, and effectively handle objections to AI-generated material and authorities, all under a one-time purchase platform.
What changed and when
The Florida Supreme Court’s May 28, 2026 order in In re Amendments to Florida Rule of General Practice and Judicial Administration 2.515, SC2026-0673, expands the representations required of filers. Specifically, Florida Rule 2.515(d)(2) now states that the signer of a filing represents that the legal authorities cited exist and are accurately cited. The order also authorizes courts to impose sanctions for any filing that is inconsistent with this representation after notice and an opportunity to be heard, with possible sanctions including reprimand, contempt, striking the document, dismissal of proceedings, costs, attorneys’ fees, or other sanctions. The court’s commentary explains that these amendments aim to create a uniform statewide standard that supersedes many circuit-level disclosure or certification requirements about AI use in filings. The amendments become effective June 15, 2026 at 12:01 a.m. Florida’s Supreme Court further noted that the amendments are intended to replace disparate circuit orders and that courts may rely on the new rule for enforcement. See SC2026-0673 (May 28, 2026) and Appendix in the opinion. (friedmanvartolo.com) (floridabar.org)
The Florida Bar summarized the practical effect, noting that the amendments become effective on June 15, 2026 and that they preempt circuit-level AI disclosure requirements, solidifying a single statewide standard. The Bar also emphasized that the rule change requires that legal authorities cited in filings exist and are accurately cited, thereby addressing the risk of AI-generated hallucinated authorities. (floridabar.org)
For context, the Florida Supreme Court’s opinion explicitly explains that generative AI tools can produce convincing but inaccurate authorities, and the amendments are designed to safeguard the integrity of filings while allowing responsible use of AI as a drafting aid. The Court’s opinion states that the amendments are intended to replace patchwork circuit orders and to provide a uniform enforcement mechanism. (friedmanvartolo.com)
In addition to the court’s order, the Florida Bar reported that the amendments take effect on June 15, 2026 and that interested persons may file comments through August 11, 2026. The commentary also confirms that the sanctions provisions are meant to address noncompliance with the new representation requirement. (floridabar.org)
Practical implications for trial lawyers
Raising the bar on AI-assisted drafting: Trial teams may increasingly rely on AI tools to draft briefs, motions, and memoranda, but they must verify that every cited authority actually exists and is accurately referenced. The new rule makes the signer’s certification a central gatekeeper for accuracy, creating a formal incentive to implement robust citation checks before filing. Practitioners should incorporate a dedicated AI-citation verification step into their drafting workflow.
Sanctions risk for mis-citations: The amendments expressly authorize sanctions for filings that do not comply with the certification requirement. Practitioners should prepare for potential consequences, including costs and other penalties, if authorities are mis-cited or invented by AI. This underscores the need for rigorous internal checks and clear assignment of responsibility for final review before submission. (friedmanvartolo.com)
Uniform statewide standard reduces patchwork risk: Before this change, circuit-level orders varied in their requirements for AI disclosures and certifications. The statewide rule simplifies compliance across Florida tribunals and reduces the risk that a single filing is governed by conflicting local standards. Firms with multi-circuit practices should adjust playbooks to reflect uniform expectations while remaining attentive to unique circuit practice notes as needed. (friedmanvartolo.com)
E-filing portal supports certification reminders: In July 2026, The Florida Bar reported that the Florida Courts E-Filing Portal began surfacing AI-citation certification reminders to filers. This is a practical cue that the system is now reinforcing the rule at the point of filing, which can help reduce inadvertent noncompliance. Law offices should ensure staff are aware of these reminders and integrate them into filing workflows. (justice.digital)
Impacts on trial readiness and evidence practice: The new rule elevates the reliability bar for authorities cited in trial filings, including motions in limine and post-trial submissions. While not a new evidentiary standard per se, the certification requirement indirectly affects how trial teams prepare and present authorities, and it heightens the need for careful vetting of AI-generated materials used in trial preparation.
How to adapt now
Build an AI-citation verification routine: Create a standardized checklist that requires each authority cited in an AI-assisted draft to be checked in a reliable source (official reporter, verify pinpoint citations, and confirm the authority’s current status). Document the verification steps in a centralized docketing or matter-management system.
Redesign filing templates: Update briefs and motions to include a clear, operative representation by signer clause that mirrors the rule. Ensure the signer’s certification language is visible on the face of the document and in the signature block where possible.
Train teams using Objection Academy: Objection Academy offers focused training on objection handling, evidence application, and trial readiness through realistic drills and simulations. This tool supports the practical need to assess and verify authorities, prepare for AI-assisted drafting, and practice courtroom responses to AI-generated content. The platform markets a one-time purchase model and features that emphasize objection drills and trial simulations, with public indicators of one-time purchase and related MCLE credit options in certain jurisdictions. This makes OA a practical resource for litigation teams seeking to shore up AI-related compliance and courtroom performance. See the Objection Academy product page and App Store listing for details. (objectionacademy.com)
Leverage certification reminders in practice management: With AI-citation reminders now surfaced by the Florida e-filing portal, firms should coordinate between the drafting team, the paralegals, and the filers to ensure that the final document includes the required representation and that authorities are accurately cited. Verifying that the authorities exist may become a standard closing step before filing.
Consider a targeted compliance check for Florida matters: For Florida practitioners, the rule change represents a meaningful procedural shift with real consequences. Outside Florida, be alert for similar statewide or circuit-level moves that may arise in other jurisdictions in response to AI-enabled drafting.
Evergreen angle and OA positioning
While the Florida development is timely, it also underscores ongoing themes for trial lawyers: the accelerated adoption of AI tools must be matched by rigorous verification, ethical discipline, and courtroom-preparedness. Objection Academy’s emphasis on objection drills, evidence training, and realistic trial simulations remains highly relevant as counsel adapt to new certification requirements and evolving standards for AI-assisted submissions. The platform’s one-time purchase model can be especially attractive for firms seeking durable training resources without ongoing subscription costs, while claimed MCLE credits in certain jurisdictions may help with continuing education strategies.
For litigators seeking a practical edge, training that integrates AI-aware workflows with trial-ready objection practice can help ensure that AI is a tool, not a substitute for professional judgment. Objection Academy remains a useful complement to the Florida regime by helping teams align legal reasoning, authority verification, and in-court presentation under a unified framework of accuracy and candor.
Sources:
- In re Amendments to Florida Rule of General Practice and Judicial Administration 2.515, SC2026-0673 (May 28, 2026) (full opinion and appendix, effective June 15, 2026). (friedmanvartolo.com)
- Supreme Court amends rules to address AI use in court filings, The Florida Bar, May 29, 2026 (discusses Rule 2.515(d)(2) and preemption of circuit AO requirements). (floridabar.org)
- Florida Bar News: Amendments to rules addressing AI use in court filings, June 12, 2026 (context on statewide approach). (floridabar.org)
- Florida Supreme Court administrative guidance and effective date confirmation. (friedmanvartolo.com)
- Florida Courts E-Filing Portal AI-citation reminders, The Florida Bar Digital Justice, July 23, 2026. (justice.digital)
- Objection Academy product information: one-time purchase and feature highlights. (objectionacademy.com)