As the upcoming 2020 election draws closer, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, John Roberts, released a report urging caution when it comes to the use of artificial intelligence (AI) by organizations during the electoral process. Roberts argues that the potential of AI to both speed up the election process and produce accurate results must be balanced against the risk of introducing biases, manipulation, or exploitation that could have a lasting impact on democracy.
The report, commissioned in May, was produced as part of the Supreme Court’s ongoing mission to promote and protect the constitutional integrity of the American electoral system. The warning comes at a time when AI is becoming increasingly popular in the world of politics – with more and more companies, governments and organizations using the technology for predictive analytics, candidate selection and even for producing political advertisements.
Roberts noted that while AI has a number of potential benefits for elections, that potential must be weighed against the risks associated with its use. He warned that the use of AI in elections could result in the potential for bias, data manipulation, and other nefarious practices that could lead to implications for voter rights, social cohesion and electoral integrity.
The report, which was based on extensive consultation with academics and technologists, offers a number of recommendations to help minimize the potential for abuse or manipulation of AI in elections. Chief among these is the creation of a cross-sectoral committee monitoring the development and use of AI in politics, with particular attention paid to any potential violations of the principles of fairness and accuracy set forth in the Constitution.
In conclusion, Roberts’ report should serve as a timely reminder for organizations to exercise caution when contemplating the use of AI for electoral purposes. With the world coming closer to the 2020 election, policymakers will have to be extra vigilant in ensuring the integrity of the democratic process.