Limiting artificial intelligence (with the Rule of Law)

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly used in public administration, yet its opacity raises concerns about arbitrary exercises of state power. This article argues that alongside regulatory frameworks, the Rule of Law supplies an independent basis for limiting state deployment of AI. Drawing on widely accepted ideas associated with the Rule of Law – predictability (decisions must guide conduct ex ante) and procedural clarity (rationales must be knowable and contestable ex post) – the article shows how these standards constrain government use of AI. It examines why black box systems frustrate legal guidance and contestability, and why explanations are often the minimally sufficient remedy. A welfare-benefits hypothetical illustrates the stakes of opacity versus explainability. The article concludes that Rule of Law limits offer a distinct and operationalizable basis for determining when state deployment of AI contravenes fundamental commitments, demonstrating that not all government uses of AI should be permitted.