The family of a woman detained at the Adelanto ICE detention center in California went looking for an immigration attorney and found one on Facebook. It was an AI-generated avatar. The account told the family that a $4,355 bond payment would get their relative released from detention. They paid. The paperwork they submitted was never filed with any court - there was no attorney to file it. The same playbook runs in reverse against real lawyers. South Florida immigration attorney Angel Leal has been targeted by AI-generated videos that show him discussing immigration cases and telling people who need representation to message him on WhatsApp. More than 6,000 scams using his name and likeness have been found online.
1 Answer
Expert: Adonia Simpson, Deputy Director for Policy, American Bar Association The Adelanto case required no sophisticated trick. A Facebook account wearing a generative avatar presented itself as an immigration attorney, named a $4,355 bond, collected it, and left the family's filings sitting unfiled - the family only learned the paperwork never reached a court afterward. The 'attorney' was AI. The American Bar Association saw the shape of it coming. On August 26, 2025 it issued a formal notice warning of a 'sharp increase in the number of individuals fraudulently posing as immigration attorneys, often falsely stating they work for reputable legal services organizations, including the ABA, or that they have special relationships with government officials.' A year later, reporting indicates the incidents have kept growing. Charity Anastasio of the American Immigration Lawyers Association told WLRN the barrier to entry is now close to zero: 'They can just impersonate you with technologies that anybody can buy very cheaply, and they can prop up a fake website or a fake set of ads on Facebook or WhatsApp.' The people most likely to be shown those ads are the ones with the least margin for a second attempt - immigrants under detention pressure, often guided by relatives who cannot verify credentials in English. The cost is not only the money. Adonia Simpson, the ABA's deputy director for policy, framed it as damage to the underlying case, not a consumer complaint: 'Their actions cause irreparable damage to immigration cases, drain immigrants' limited financial resources and leave victims vulnerable to detention or removal.' A filing that was never made can forfeit a visa or asylum claim outright - a deadline that does not wait for the victim to discover the lawyer was synthetic. Why the fakes keep winning is an enforcement question. States have passed laws against practicing immigration law without authorization, but those penalties are limited to misdemeanor charges and small fines, per the reporting - a rounding error set against a four-figure payday. The impersonated lawyer is left with the smaller problem: 'This vulnerable population is being hurt in this fashion, in my name, and that's what most distressing to me,' Angel Leal told NBC-6 in Miami. The failure mode is structural, not textual. An AI avatar has no bar number, no accreditation and no professional license to lose, so nothing in the system stops it from quoting a price for representation it cannot provide. What the victims were shown was an interface - an avatar, a video, a WhatsApp ad - and a payment request. That is the signature worth checking before any money moves. Source: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/immigration/4694422/scams-involving-ai-bots-posing-as-immigration-lawyers-rise-amid-deportations/
Your answer
Sign in to verify this AI response.
Don't trust us — or the AI. Ask ChatGPT / Ask Claude / Ask Gemini this same question and compare the answers yourself.
More from this topic
While briefing cross-motions for summary judgment in a $12 million Oregon vineyard inheritance dispute, the plaintiff's attorneys filed three briefs that had been drafted with the help of an AI tool. The filings contained 15 references to "nonexistent cases" and eight fabricated quotations, all written in ordinary legal citation form, with case names, reporters and pin cites presented as if they were real authority. Nothing in the briefs told the court which passages came from the AI tool, or that the authority had not been checked. The fabricated material was only identified after the defendants' attorneys flagged it. Once the errors surfaced, attorney Stephen Brigandi deleted the false references and refiled the argument - without checking the rest of the briefs, which the court later found still contained misstatements of law. The court's opinion does not identify the specific AI product used, and no party produced the prompts or chat logs. The judge noted "circumstantial" but "persuasive" evidence that the client, Joanne Couvrette - described by the defense as a serial self-represented litigant - was likely the person who used AI to draft the briefs, but held that it was the attorneys who signed their names to the filings.
Asked about Canadian fiddler Ashley MacIsaac, Google's AI Overview told searchers that he had been convicted of a series of criminal offences — sexual assault, internet luring, assaulting a woman and attempting to assault a minor — and that he was listed on the national sex offender registry for life. Every one of those statements was false. The summary was built from online articles about a different man in Atlantic Canada who shares his last name. MacIsaac found out in December 2025, when the Sipekne'katik First Nation cancelled a concert he was due to play that month, citing the AI summary, after members of the public complained about what they had read.
Chatbot answer shown to visitors on an aesthetic medicine clinic's website, advertising its two reality-TV doctors: both are 'Fachärzte für ästhetische Medizin' - certified specialists in aesthetic medicine. No such specialist title exists under German medical-chamber rules. When Verbraucherzentrale NRW challenged the claim, the clinic's defence was that the AI had made the title up.