An AI Use Policy Template for Immigration Law Firms
A complete AI use policy template for immigration law firms — approved tools, where staff should use AI, prompt guardrails, confidentiality, and a sign-off block.
Your team is already using AI. The only question is whether they're doing it on firm-approved tools under a written AI use policy for your immigration law firm, or quietly on personal accounts with client facts pasted in. After United States v. Heppner — where a court held exchanges with a public AI tool weren't privileged — that gap is the managing attorney's personal liability.
This is a template you can adopt this week. It's a starting point, not legal advice; adapt every section to your jurisdiction's bar rules before you put it into effect.
A Good Policy Does Two Jobs — Most Do Only One
The Florida Bar's Ethics Advisory Opinion 24-1 and the ABA's AI guidance put the duty on the attorney, not the tool. But a policy that only says "be careful" creates the two problems owners actually have:
- Shadow AI. Staff use personal ChatGPT-style accounts because the firm never gave them an approved one — with client data going into consumer tools that train on inputs.
- Under-adoption. Cautious staff use AI too little, so you never get the capacity you're paying for.
A real policy contains the risk and drives correct use. This template does both.
The Template
Copy everything in the box into a firm document, fill in the bracketed parts, and have every team member sign it.
[Firm Name] — Artificial Intelligence Use Policy
Effective date: [date] · Applies to: all attorneys, paralegals, and staff · Owner: [AI lead] · Review: quarterly
1. Purpose
Enable fast, safe, consistent AI use across the firm while protecting client confidentiality and privilege. AI is expected to be part of how we work — within the rules below.
2. Approved tools and accounts
- Use only firm-provided AI tools, signed in with your firm account (work email / firm SSO). [List approved tools and what each is for.]
- Personal or consumer AI accounts must never touch firm or client information — no exceptions, not even "just to check something."
- No AI browser extensions, AI note-takers, or third-party AI add-ons on client matters unless they appear on the approved list.
- Why:
- Consumer tools' terms typically allow them to train on and disclose what you enter.
- Heppner shows those exchanges may not be privileged.
- Only firm accounts give the firm visibility into who used which tool on what — needed for supervision, training, and oversight.
3. Where you are expected to use AI (and how)
These are the firm's default workflow. On approved tools, use AI to produce first drafts of:
- Cover letters, briefs, and legal memoranda
- RFE and NOID responses (structure the response; the attorney refines the argument)
- Declarations and personal statements from intake notes
- Hardship and country-conditions summaries from the record
- Exhibit indices, case timelines, and filing checklists
- Summaries of long records, prior filings, and correspondence
- Plain-language client update drafts (attorney reviews before sending)
How: start from the firm template, give the tool the case facts and the goal, get a first draft, then verify and finish it. The aim is a faster draft you improve — never a final product you trust blind. See our AI prompting guide for technique.
4. Where AI is not the decision-maker
- No legal strategy, judgment, or advice to a client is finalized from AI output without attorney review.
- Nothing is filed, served, or sent to a client or tribunal without human verification and attorney sign-off.
- No AI-generated citation is used until a human confirms it exists and says what it's cited for.
5. Prompt guardrails (every time)
Put these constraints in your prompts or the tool's saved instructions:
- "Use only the facts I provide. Do not invent names, dates, facts, or citations."
- "Follow this firm template exactly: [attach/paste]."
- "Flag anything you're unsure about instead of guessing."
- "Give a source for any legal proposition; if you can't, say so."
- State the form, visa type, and jurisdiction every time — never let the tool assume.
- Give it the real record (in an approved tool only), not a vague summary — input quality sets draft quality.
6. Confidentiality and client consent (ABA Model Rule 1.6)
- Client-identifying or case-sensitive information goes only into Section 2 approved tools.
- The firm's retainer includes an AI-use clause: [reference clause].
- Informed client consent is obtained where the rules or the matter require it.
7. Human review and accountability (ABA Model Rule 5.3)
- A qualified team member verifies every AI-assisted work product; an attorney gives final sign-off before anything is filed or sent.
- Once submitted, AI-assisted output is the firm's own work product — checked for facts, citations, dates, completeness, and tone.
8. If something goes wrong
- If client information is entered into a non-approved or personal tool, report it to [AI lead] the same day. Early disclosure limits harm; concealment compounds it.
9. Records, training, and ownership
- Every team member completes training on this policy before using AI on client matters and signs below.
- [Name] is the firm's AI lead — approves tools, runs training, owns the quarterly review.
- This policy is reviewed quarterly as tools, case law, and bar guidance change.
Acknowledgment
I have read, understood, and agree to comply with this AI Use Policy.
Employee name:
Signature: Date:
How to Roll This Out
- Name an AI lead before anything else — a policy without an owner decays in a quarter.
- Fill in Section 2 with tools you can actually approve, and create firm accounts so no one needs a personal one.
- Edit every section to your state's rules and your retainer.
- Run one documented training session; collect a signed acknowledgment from each person.
- Re-review quarterly. Heppner and the bar opinions are recent; this area moves.
The hardest part is Section 2 — approving tools and giving staff firm accounts so shadow AI never starts. The bar of approval is simple: the tool is attorney-directed, built for legal work, and contractually does not train on or disclose your data. That's the line Heppner draws between exposure and protection — full breakdown in our analysis of the ruling.
Drafty AI was built to sit on the approved side of that line, with firm accounts for your whole team. See pricing, or start a free trial to evaluate it against your policy before you roll it out.