For the past several months, attorneys filing in Broward and Miami-Dade have had to manage two different sets of rules about disclosing the use of generative AI in court filings. As of June 15, 2026, that patchwork is gone, replaced by a single statewide rule that focuses on the accuracy of the citations rather than the disclosure of the tool.
This post explains what the Florida Supreme Court did, what each of the now-superseded local orders required, and what should change in a Florida litigator's workflow as of June 15.
What the Supreme Court Did
On May 28, 2026, the Florida Supreme Court issued its opinion in Case No. SC2026-0673, amending Florida Rule of General Practice and Judicial Administration 2.515(d)(2). The amended rule takes effect at 12:01 a.m. on June 15, 2026. Public comments are accepted through August 11, 2026.
The amendment makes two changes:
- The signer of any filing must represent that "the legal authorities identified exist and are accurately cited."
- Courts may impose sanctions for any filing inconsistent with that representation, after providing the signer notice and an opportunity to be heard.
The available sanctions include "reprimand, contempt, striking of the document, dismissal of proceedings, costs, attorneys' fees, or other sanctions."
An accompanying administrative order makes the statewide approach exclusive. Individual courts "may not impose such requirements — whether through local administrative orders, court policies, judicial practices and procedures, or other means." That preemption sweeps in not just the 11th and 17th Circuit orders, but any future attempt by an individual circuit, division, or judge to create a circuit-specific AI regime.
What the Local Orders Required
The Miami-Dade and Broward orders, both issued in January 2026, took a different approach. They required affirmative AI disclosure on the face of any filing prepared with the help of generative AI.
Miami-Dade (11th Judicial Circuit). Chief Judge Ariana Fajardo Orshan's Administrative Order No. 26-04, issued January 15, 2026, required attorneys and self-represented litigants to disclose any use of generative AI in the preparation of a pleading, motion, memorandum, response, proposed order, or other court record. The order specified certification language and applied to both attorneys and self-represented litigants.
Broward (17th Judicial Circuit). Chief Judge Carol-Lisa Phillips' Administrative Order 2026-03-Gen, issued January 26, 2026, required similar disclosure but added a duty to identify the specific AI tool used, and reached not only pleadings but also deposition summaries and discovery materials.
Each order carried penalties including striking of pleadings, monetary sanctions, contempt, and disciplinary referrals.
As of June 15, both orders are superseded by the new statewide rule. Practitioners can stop using the local certification templates on that date.
What Changes in a Florida Litigator's Workflow
The new rule shifts the certification target. Under Rule 2.515(d)(2) as amended:
- Disclosure of AI use is no longer required. There is no statewide replacement form because none is needed.
- Citation accuracy is required. Every filing must contain only citations to authorities that actually exist and are accurately quoted and characterized.
- The standard applies regardless of how the citation was generated. An attorney who hand-types every word is in the same position as one who used a generative tool. A citation to a non-existent case is sanctionable either way.
For most firms, the practical compliance steps are familiar:
- Verify every citation before filing. Run each authority through a current database. Confirm not only that the case exists but that the quoted language, the holding, and the procedural posture are accurate as cited.
- Verify AI-assisted work twice. Generative tools can fabricate convincing-sounding case names and pinpoint citations. A "looks right" check is not enough. Pull the case.
- Retire local certification templates effective June 15. Strip the Broward and Miami-Dade AI-disclosure boilerplate from your forms. Keep your underlying internal AI-use policy if you have one, but the filing-level certification language is no longer required.
- Document your verification process. If a citation is later challenged, the "notice and opportunity to be heard" language in the rule gives you a chance to show what you did. Internal verification records help.
- Apply the same standard to self-represented filings. Self-represented litigants were specifically covered by the Miami-Dade order and remain bound by Rule 2.515(d)(2). Practitioners opposing self-represented parties should be prepared to flag fabricated authorities just as they would against opposing counsel.
Closing Note
The new rule does not require firms to abandon AI in legal work; it requires firms to own the output. The comment period closes August 11, 2026. Practitioners with concerns about scope or implementation can file comments through the Florida Supreme Court's electronic filing portal.