Flagship tracker
Risk Digest
The flagship, near-daily updated database of documented AI hallucination and sanction incidents in legal proceedings worldwide. Each entry is a structured record, not a news article: jurisdiction, court, judge (if named), the AI tool implicated, penalty amount, ruling date, a confirmed-vs-reported status flag, and a link to the primary court order. Serves the 'check risk' and 'track regulation' tasks: a lawyer, risk manager, or journalist scanning for new sanctions, a specific jurisdiction, or a specific tool. Excludes narrative commentary, procedural how-to guidance (belongs in Workflows), and rule text summaries (belongs in Regulation). This group is the site's differentiation engine: freshness and per-record sourcing are the moat, so every record must carry a last-verified timestamp distinct from the ruling date.
Confirmed
A court order or docket entry has been independently verified.
Reported — unverified
Still pending independent verification against a primary source.
CONFIRMEDUpdatedJurisdictionUS federalCourtU.S. District Court for the District of ColumbiaToolNo AI tool namedRuling dateJul 22, 2026Why the Jan. 6 Pence Tweet Was an Official Act
Judge Mehta's July 22, 2026 order in Lee v. Trump kept the 2:24 p.m. Pence tweet within official-act immunity and certified the question for D.C. Circuit review, so the tweet's immunity remains open on appeal while the Ellipse speech and Raffensperger call stay classified as unofficial. The verified record also fixes the procedural deadlines — plaintiffs' notice of appeal due Aug. 5, opening brief due Aug. 10 — for anyone tracking the docket.
Last verified
CONFIRMEDUpdatedJurisdictionUS-TXCourtU.S. Department of Labor, Wage and Hour DivisionToolNo AI tool implicatedRuling dateAug 4, 2026DOL Cites San Antonio Bakery for Child Labor and Wages
A U.S. Department of Labor investigation at La Panaderia Bakery & Cafe resulted in a $25,706 civil penalty for child labor violations, along with minimum-wage and overtime findings across three San Antonio locations. This record details what the Wage and Hour Division cited, how the employer responded, and what remains unresolved.
Last verified
CONFIRMEDUpdatedJurisdictionUSCourtMultiple U.S. courtsToolClearview AIRuling dateMar 20, 2025The legal issues with police surveillance AI, explained
A primary-source-linked record of the documented legal issues with police facial recognition surveillance: the known wrongful arrests, the recurring failure pattern behind them, and the settlements, court-imposed duties, and state statutes that now bind police use. Use it to screen a case for facial-recognition involvement, Brady/notice problems, or procurement risk.
Last verified
REPORTED — UNVERIFIEDUpdatedJurisdictionUS federalCourtU.S. District Court for the District of MinnesotaToolRockwell, Schneider Electric, Siemens PLCsRuling dateJul 30, 2026Prosecuting the Minnesota water cyberattack if tied to Iran
An assessment of the federal charges and enforcement tools available for the 2026 Minnesota water utility cyberattack, showing how the documented conduct maps to CFAA claims while attribution — still unconfirmed as of August 5, 2026 — remains the controlling legal issue.
Last verified
CONFIRMEDUpdatedJurisdictionD.C. CircuitCourtU.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (en banc)ToolNo AI tool namedRuling dateAug 4, 2026What the en banc court held in the EPA green bank clawback suit
Verified record as of Aug. 4, 2026: the en banc D.C. Circuit kept EPA from terminating the GGRF grants or clawing back the roughly $19.97B at issue, but the equally divided vote on the remaining relief left the forum and repeal questions open. This record separates what the judgment decided from what remains open, with primary-source links and confirmed-versus-reported status flags.
Last verified
REPORTED — UNVERIFIEDUpdatedJurisdictionJapanCourtNo court proceeding; assembly independent probe activeToolNo AI tool implicatedRuling dateJul 30, 2026What legal exposure remains in the Fukuoka assembly scandal?
As of August 5, 2026, there is no known criminal referral, yet Fukuoka assembly cash-for-speakership payments carry defined exposure: bribery under Penal Code Arts. 197-198 (up to seven years), Political Funds Control Act false statements (up to five years), and Local Autonomy Act Art. 100 scrutiny of travel spending. Whether anyone is charged turns on which contested investigation mechanism the assembly permits, not on the strength of the allegations.
Last verified
CONFIRMEDUpdatedJurisdictionUS FederalCourtU.S. District Court for the Western District of MichiganToolUnspecified generative AIRuling dateJul 16, 2026What the Blanche DOJ fight means for federal AI enforcement
A record-level briefing on the AI-policy stakes of the Todd Blanche confirmation fight: the DOJ AI Litigation Task Force mandate under EO 14365, the digital-asset enforcement retreat, and how federal courts are treating AI-tainted DOJ filings. It gives litigators and in-house counsel a primary-source-anchored risk read on what an AG Blanche would mean for federal AI enforcement, without predicting specific enforcement outcomes.
Last verified
CASE-STATUS-REPORTEDUpdatedJurisdictionUS-WACourtWashington State LegislatureToolFlock SafetyRuling dateMar 30, 2026Can police stop a car on a Flock camera theft alert alone?
Flock plate misreads have produced wrongful theft stops, taxpayer settlements, and dropped charges—and a hot-list ping alone is not probable cause. Under Washington SB 6002, officers must support an ALPR stop with independent suspicion or immediate visual-plus-database confirmation, and the documented failures show why that verification step matters.
Last verified
REPORTED — UNVERIFIEDUpdatedJurisdictionUS Federal (C.D. Cal.)CourtU.S. District Court for the Central District of CaliforniaToolNo AI tool involvedRuling dateSep 11, 2026The PSA Antitrust Lawsuit, Explained
A source-linked, record-style explainer of the PSA antitrust class action (Rasmussen v. Collectors Holdings): the disputed Section 7 claims over the SGC and Beckett acquisitions, the remedies sought, and the stakes at the September 11, 2026 hearing on the motions to dismiss and compel arbitration — with every market figure labeled as allegation, not court finding.
Last verified
REPORTED, PENDINGUpdatedJurisdictionUS FederalCourtU.S. District Court for the District of ColumbiaToolNo AI tool implicatedRuling dateAug 18, 2026FBI agents sue Patel for firing in political retaliation
A docket-verified status record of Garman v. Patel, 1:26-cv-01086 (D.D.C.), the class action by three fired FBI agents claiming political retaliation, before Judge Jia M. Cobb. It lays out the parties, claims, relief, and dated docket history through August 5, 2026 — with the government's motion to dismiss still pending — and flags source-level uncertainty for citing attorneys.
Last verified
CONFIRMEDUpdatedJurisdictionUS federalCourtSEC administrative proceedingToolAI-enabled investment adviceRuling dateMar 18, 2024Which SEC rules require AI capex disclosure?
No SEC rule singles out AI capital spending, but several existing disclosure obligations can compel public companies to surface AI capex, from MD&A known-trends analysis to risk factors and antifraud liability. This record maps each legal hook, its trigger, and the enforcement consequences so disclosure teams can see where AI spend becomes a filing obligation.
Last verified
CONFIRMEDUpdatedJurisdictionUS FederalCourtU.S. District Court for the Northern District of GeorgiaToolNone namedRuling dateMay 4, 2026The Equifax Class Action Claim Deadline Is Sept. 1, 2026
Equifax's only active 2026 claim deadline is Sept. 1 for the duplicate-account class action — not the long-closed data-breach fund. This verified record covers eligibility, the sole official filing portal, and scam red flags.
Last verified
PENDINGUpdatedJurisdictionMissouriCourtMissouri state courtsToolNoneRuling dateAug 4, 2026Missouri Amendment 4's Actual Legal Impact on Campaigns
Missouri already bans foreign campaign money and criminalizes petition fraud, so Amendment 4's actual legal impact is lower penalties, exclusive Attorney General enforcement, and new mailing and hearing costs for ballot committees. The current-law-versus-proposed-text comparison helps campaign counsel and compliance staff see what a Yes or No vote would really change.
Last verified
REPORTED — UNVERIFIEDUpdatedJurisdictionCalifornia, United StatesCourtSanta Cruz County Superior CourtToolNo AI tool implicatedRuling dateAug 1, 2026Three arrests in Santa Cruz police shooting, no charges yet
Verified legal status of the July 13, 2026 Santa Cruz shooting as of August 4: Santa Cruz PD — not an officer-involved incident — made three arrests announced July 31 and August 1, two booked on attempted-murder suspicion, but no District Attorney filing decision or court docket exists yet. The record separates confirmed facts from police-reported allegations while the investigation remains open.
Last verified
CONFIRMEDUpdatedJurisdictionUS FederalCourtU.S. District Court for the Northern District of CaliforniaToolGoogle Generative AIRuling dateJun 6, 2024Google Lens now feeds AI training. Privacy law is split.
The mid-2026 Search Services History change now makes Google Lens images, voice searches, and Translate recordings part of Google's AI training data by default. Counsel assessing risk should separate claim types: generalized US privacy claims have failed on standing, biometric-content theory is the strongest remaining US path, and the Irish DPC's PaLM 2 inquiry makes EU exposure a live regulatory matter.
Last verified
REPORTED — UNVERIFIEDUpdatedJurisdictionEU; US federal; US stateCourtVarious (EU regulatory context; U.S. federal/state courts)ToolNano Banana 2 (Google Earth AI image generator)Ruling dateJul 31, 2026Who faces legal risk when AI fakes satellite images?
Google Earth's AI satellite-image generator was launched and pulled within a day, but the legal exposure it created did not roll back with it. This record assigns who carries that risk — generator, publisher, deployer, or relying litigator — under the EU AI Act's Article 50, US evidence-authentication doctrine, and state deepfake statutes.
Last verified
INTRODUCED / NOT ENACTEDUpdatedJurisdictionUS FederalCourtU.S. CongressToolNoneRuling dateJun 29, 2026What the Social Security 2100 Act Would Change
The 2026 Social Security 2100 Act (H.R. 9519 / S. 5042) is a time-limited, 10-year expansion rather than a permanent benefit increase: benefit changes would apply only from 2027 through 2036, while the payroll-cap repeal and new investment-income tax are permanent. This provision-by-provision breakdown shows which beneficiaries each change actually targets, which provisions sunset, and why the introduced bill is not yet law.
Last verified
CONFIRMEDUpdatedJurisdictionUS federalCourtFinCEN (administrative proceeding)ToolAutomated AML monitoring tool (unnamed)Ruling dateAug 3, 2026UBS fined a record $125 million for money laundering
FinCEN's $125 million penalty against UBS Financial Services Inc. is the largest Bank Secrecy Act fine ever imposed on a broker-dealer. This verified record lays out the joint SEC-FINRA-CFTC resolution, the admitted AML and SAR failures, and the remediation terms compliance teams should benchmark against.
Last verified
CONFIRMEDUpdatedJurisdictionU.S. FederalCourtU.S. District CourtToolNo AI tool implicatedRuling dateJul 13, 2026Why Trump's IRS audit immunity was never lawful
The May 2026 arrangement barring IRS examination of President Trump's past returns was invalid on statutory grounds before any court acted: § 7122 did not give the acting attorney general that settlement power, and § 7217 separately criminalizes presidential audit interference. The July 13 bad-faith ruling stripped the deal of judicial cover, but gaps remain — no confirmed IRS chief counsel, an undefined personal scope, and a surviving private settlement.
Last verified
CONFIRMEDUpdatedJurisdictionUS-FederalCourtMultiple federal courts (D.D.C., D.C. Circuit, Supreme Court, D. Mass.)ToolNo AI tool implicatedRuling dateApr 18, 2022What courts actually decided on Medicaid work requirements
A docket-by-docket record of Medicaid work-requirement litigation from Stewart v. Azar (2018) through the pending Massachusetts v. Oz challenge, with court, judge, ruling date, status, and the coverage-loss figure at stake in each case. The piece closes with a merits outlook for the January 1, 2027 implementation date.
Last verified