Will robots replace lawyers? No. Will they replace legal work? Absolutely! I think about eDiscovery. When I was a baby lawyer 20 years ago, we used to do document production, document review, and diligence work by hand. Lawyers would go through boxes and boxes and boxes of documents. We don’t do that today. Now, we use technology assisted review or predictive coding to do that kind of discovery work. Are there more lawyers or fewer lawyers? There are more lawyers. Electronic discovery didn’t replace lawyers; it just allowed them to practice at the top of their degree. I think a lot about a friend of mine named Billie Tarascio. She’s a lawyer in Arizona, a family law lawyer. She found that she was doing the same 20 documents over and over for her clients. She hated it. It was expensive for them, tedious for her, so she automated all the documents She posted them on her website and allowed clients to fill them out themselves and submit them to the courts. She thought her business was going to drop through the floor. Instead, it went through the roof. Her clients would call her and say, “Now we need to meet.” And, she would say, “No we don’t, just file your document in the court.” And they would say, “No, we need to meet because I need to tell my story.” Billie thought that her business as a lawyer was filing documents in billing hours. That wasn’t the value to her clients. For her clients, the value was someone to stand shoulder to shoulder with her and say, “Everything’s gonna be all right.” “Here’s what’s going to happen next. I’ve seen worse.” The value of a lawyer can be more human. So, I say, give to Caesar what is Caesar’s. The things that are robotic about law practice should be done by machines, enabling lawyers to practice at the top of their degree, to do the things that are fundamentally human about lawyering. And, hopefully, that will mean that the practice is better both for clients and for lawyers.