Algorithms and adjudication

This essay addresses a version of Jerome Frank’s question – ‘Are Judges Human?’ asking instead: are human judges necessary? It begins, in section II, by outlining the technological developments which inform view that they not and critically evaluates juristic position seemingly endorses it. That is labelled ‘technological evangelism’ it consists three claims about law adjudication: certainty, determinacy partiality claims. Section III shows these utterly incompatible with what calls standard non-standard views adjudication law, while IV considers some ways proponents evangelism might try to reject views. concludes no plausible efforts have so far been made evangelists views, those therefore maintain their existing explanatory normative priority. The overall conclusion critical engagement as we know them, but an effort replace them: game-changing intervention, game-ending one.